Skip to main content

Full text of "The Burlington magazine"

See other formats






A-<ivaf< ri<i!f. <i~},^ff:,.ion.' 


Burlington Magazine 

for Connoisseurs 

Illustrated &? Published Monthly 

Volume XVIII— October 19 lo to March 191 1 















































C. H. READ, LL.D., P.S.A. 


Professor HANS W. SINGER 




Notcson Pictures in the Royal Collections. By LionelCust, M.V.O.,F.S.A. — XVIII. 

XIX. Paintings attributed to Lucas van Leyden . . . . 

XX. The Equestrian Portraits of Charles I by Van Dyck— Part IL . 

Notes on Italian Medals. By G. F. Hill— X 

The Weakness and Strength of Turner. By A. Clutton Brock . 
New Pictures by Francesco Napolitano. By Seymour de Ricci . 
Towards a Grouping of Chinese Porcelains. By Friedrich Perzynski — I. 


Giovanni Caroto. By Barclay Baron- 







An Early Dutch Wood-cut of St. Christopher. By Campbell D 
A Mediaeval Chasuble at Barnstaple. By Mary Phillips Perry 
Daphnephoros (the Laurel-bearer). By Eugenic Strong . 
Chinese Paintings in the British Museum. By Laurence Binyon 
Vincent van Gogh. By R. Meyer Ricfstahl — I 

Hispano-Moresque Carpets. By W. G. Thomson . 
Sheffield Plate : the Period of Registered Marks. By H. N. Veitch 
A Newly-Discovered Picture by Vermeer of Delft. By Dr. C. Hofstcde de G 

A Portrait attributed to Raphael. By Roger Fry 

Buddhist Art in the Far East and the Documents from Chinese Turkestan. 
Professor R. Petrucci ...... 

Giovannino de' Grassi and the Brothers Van Limbourg. By Sir Martin Conway . 144 

French Portrait-Drawings at Knowsley. By Louis Dimier 

A Portrait of Leonello d'Este by Roger van der Weyden. By Roger Fry 

The Master of the Amsterdam Cabinet and Two New Works by his Hand 

Dr. Willy Storck • 

A Sacra Conversazione in the Hermitage. By Tancred Borcnius . 

Ox-Yokes in the North of Portugal. By Paul Lafond 

The Post-Impressionists. By A. Clutton Brock .... 

The Furniture of the Gillow Cost-Books. By Herbert Cescinsky — Part II 

Monvaerni and Montbas. By Egerton Beck 

Two Drawings by Andrea Mantegna in the Boymans Museum of Rotterdam 
F. Schmidt-Degener .....••• 

Classical Influence on the Italian Medal. By G. F. Hill . 

On a Portrait Drawing by Hans Holbein the Younger. By Lionel Cust 

Studies in Composition. By Martin Aldur ..... 

The Technique of Greek and Roman Weaving. By Luther Hooper . 

On a Profile Portrait by Baldovinetti. By Roger Fry 

Diirer and the Housebook Master. By Sir Martin Conway 

Genoese Lintel-Reliefs in Chios. By F. W. Hasluck 

Plato's ' Atlantis ' Re-discovered. By Charles H. Read, P.S.A. . 














1 1 1 







2 10 
2 1 6 
2 19 







CONTENTS OF VOL. X\l\\~ continued 

Old MarcLisitc jewellery. By Dudley C. Falcke .... 
The Emblem of St. Ansano. By Alice Kemp-Welch 

An Unpublished Picture by Bartolomco Montagna. By Tancred Borenius 
Editorial ; — 

The National Gallery ...... 

Holman Hunt ....... 

International Exhibitions and Loans of Works of Art 

A National Eyesore ...... 

National Memorials and King Edward VII 










National Memorials and Selection Committees 
On Bequests to Public Galleries ..... 
Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes ? — Recent Appointments . 
Notes on Various Works of Art : — 

The JVomati with the Arrow, by Rembrandt (C. J. Holmes) ; The Signed 

and Dated Janssens in the National Gallery (C. H. C. B.) . .118 

Two Fourteenth-century Chests (Sir Martin Conway) ; John Osborne 
(Sir Martin Conway) ; The New Mantegna in the Louvre (L. C.) ; 
The^Brothers Le Nain (L. C.) ; The Palace of Cintra (L. C.) ; Guardi 
and the Accademia di Pittura, Venice (George A. Simonson) ; An 
Additional Note on the Portrait of Leonello d'Este (A. van de Put) . 228 
Portrait of an Ecclesiastic by Diego Velazquez, in the Collection of the 
Marques de la Vega-Inclan (A. de Beruete) ; On a Newly-discovered 
Portrait by Rembrandt (L. C.) ; Francesco- Napolitano (Herbert 
Cook) ; Unrecognized Knellers in the National Portrait Gallery 
(H. Collins Baker) ; Cologne Museum for the Art of the Far East 
(Laurence Binyon) ; Acquisitions by the National Gallery at 
Helsingfors (Roger Fry) ; An Exhibition of English Pastellists, in Paris 284 
Letters to the Editors : 

Minerva — Bronze, attributed to Cellini (Charles Loeser) ; Pictures in 

the Robert Hoe Collection (W. R. Valentiner) ; The Tiepolo 

Frescoes in the Palazzo Labia at Venice (Mme. Wiel) . . -52 

Good-bye to ' Monvaerni ' ? (H. P. Mitchell). The Turner Bequest ; 

the Repudiated Authenticity of Drawings in the National Gallery 

(W. White) 119 

The Letters of Vincent van Gogh (Mme. J. Cohen Gosschalk Bonger) ; 
Gowy (Morton H. Bernath) ........ 233 

Good-bye to 'Monvaerni'? (H. P. Mitchell); Concerning Lucas van 
Leyden (Morton H. Bernath) ; Signor Virzi's Picture (Dan Fellows 
Piatt) ........... 294 

Reviews and Notes ...... 59, 122, 192, 237, 296, 353 

Art in France (R. E. D.) ....... 125, 194, 303, 363 

Art in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (H. W. S.) . . 65, 127, 195, 250 

Art in America . . . . . . . . . . . .196 




Frontispiece : St. Sebastian, by Antonio Moro 

(in the possession of Mr. Lesser) ... 2 
Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections — 

Plate I — [a] Philip II, [b] Jnana of Austria 
(Buckingham Palace) 8 

Plate 2 — Portrait of a man, and nf his wife 

(Battle Abbey) ro 

Notes on Italian Medals— X : — 

Plate I — Portrait medals : Benvenuto Cellini. 
[a] Ercole II, Duke of Ferrara, etc., obverse 
only, by Cellini ; [b] Cardinal Jean de 
Loraine, here assigned to Cellini (both in 
Mr. Max Rosenheim's collection) ; [c] 
Scaramuccia Trivulzio, here assigned to 
Cellini (Mr. Whitcombe Green's collection). 15 

Plate II— Portrait medals, [a] Clement VII, 
by Cellini ; [b] Pietro Piantanida, here 
assigned to Cellini ; [c] Antonio Bossi (all 
in the British Museum) ; [d] Francesco 
Foscari, Doge (Bibliotheque Nationale) ; 
[e] Cristoforo Mauro, Doge, here assigned 
to Antonello Grifo (British Museum). Com- 
memorative medal, [f] Gian Giacomo 
Trivulzio, early sixteenth century Milanese 
(Mr. Max Rosenheim's collection) . .18 
New Pictures by Francesco Napolitano : — 

Plate — Three pictures of the Madonna and 
Child by Francesco Napolitano : [a] (in the 
possession of Mr. G. Bauer) ; [b] (M. 
Salomon Reinach's collection) ; [c] (Zurich 

Museum) 27 

Towards a Grouping of Chinese Porcelains — 
I : Blue underglaze decoration : — 

Plate I — Vases, ChiaChing period (1522-1566). 
[a] from the Imperial factory [b] from the 
province of Fuchien (both in British 
Museum, Franks collection) . . .31 

Plate II — Bowls, Wan Li period (1573-1619), 
[a] and [b] (South Kensington Museum, 
Salting collection) ; [c] (British Museum, 
Franks collection) 35 

Plate III — [a], Top of Cake-box, Marked, Lung 
Ch'ing period (1567-1572); [b] Plate, Wan Li 
period (both in British Museum, Franks 
collection), [c] Cup, Seki-hcki type, early 
Wan Li period (Kunstgewerbe Museum, 

Berlin) 38 

Giovanni Caroto — I : — 

Plate — [a] Madonna enthroned, detail from 
picture with St. Paul and St. Peter (S. Paolo 
di Campo Marzo, Verona) ; [b] Madonna 
enthroned with Saints and a Donor (S. 
Giovanni in Fonte, Verona) ; both by 

Giovanni Caroto 45 

An Early Dutch Woodcut of St. Christopher : — 

Plate — Principitim d Ars Totius Miisicce, 
woodcut by Jost de Negker (Kestner Museum, 

Hanover) 48 

A Mediaeval Chasuble at Barnstaple : — 

Plate — Sixteenth Century English Chasuble, 
and detail (St. Peter's Church, -Barnstaple) . 53 


Minerva^ Bronze attributed to Cellini. 

Plate — Mercury, Bronze here attributed to 
Jacopo Sansovino (Alterthiimer Museum, 

Stuttgart 56 

Daphnephoros, detail (Museo delle Terme, 

Rome) f>8 

Daphnephoros (the Laurel- bearer) : — 

Plate I— [a] Apollo of Cythera (British Museum) ; 
[b] Daphnephoros (Museo delle Terme) . 73 

Plate II — Daphnephoros, with detail (Museo 
delle Terme) ...... 76 

Chinese Paintings in the British Museum — II: — 

Plate I — The Earthly Paradise, painter un- 
known, Ming dynasty . . . .83 

Plate II — [a] Portrait of a Lady, painter un- 
known, Ming dynasty (early) ; [e] A Phoenix 
and Mate, painter unknown, Ming dynasty 
(early) 80 

Plate III— [a] Tartar Shooting Turtle-doves, 
by Ch'en Chu-chung, Ming dynasty ; [b] 
Eagle attacking a Bear, by Chia Pin, Ming 
dynasty (later) 8.; 

(All in the British Museum) 
Vincent van Gogh — I : — 

Plate I — Le Jardin de Maraichers. Bateaux a 
Maree basse 93 

Plate II — Portrait de 1' Artiste a la pallette. 
Cypres 96 

(All by Vincent van Gogh) 
Hispano-Moresque Carpets : — 

Plate I— [a] First half of tifteenth century ; [b] 
circ. 1446 (both in the possession of Mr. L. 
Harris) loj 

Plate II — [.k\ Sixteenth century ; [a] Alcaraz 
carpet, Hrst half of sixteenth century (both 
in South Kensington Museum); [c] the 'Tree ' 
carpet (Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin) ; 
I'd] middle of fifteenth century (Kaiser 
Friedrich Museum, Berlin) . . .106 

Colour Plate — Early sixteenth century (in the 
possession of Messrs. Lenygon . . . lo.j 
Sheffield Plate: the Period of Registered Marks: — 

Plate I — [a] Candlesticks ; [c] Coasters (in the 
possession of Mr. B. Harrison) ; [b] Wire- 
work (in the Author's possession) . .11.' 

Plate II — [a] Mustard Pots ; [c] Argyles (in 
the possession of Mr. B. Harrison); [b] 
Group of Various Plate (in the possession of 
Messrs. Elkington) ; [d] Cup and Cover (in 
the possession of Messrs. Wilson and Sharp) r 16 
The Woman Weighing Gold ; by Vermeer of 

Delft 130 

A Portrait attributed to Raphael : — 

Plate — Portrait of a Physician, attributed to 
Raphael (collection of Signor Tommaso 

Virzi) 135 

Buddhist Art in the Far East and the Documents 
from Chinese Turkestan : — 

Plate I — A niche by the entrance, in Grotto 
No. XVII (Chavannes Mission), sculpture of 
the fifth century after Christ. At Yun-Kang. 139 

LIST OF VhhTE^— continued 


Phte II — Fragment of a frieze in the angle of 
the east wall of the Grotto Pin-Yang, com- 
manded by Tni, King of Wei, in 642 a.d., for 
the welfare of liis mother, who died in 636. 
At Long- Men (Chavannes Mission) . • M- 
Giovannino de' Grassi and the Brothers Van 
Linibourg : — 

Plate I— [a] The Presentation of the Virgin ; 
hy Taddeo Gaddi (Baroncelli Chapel, Sta. 
Croce, Florence), [n] Tiie Purification, 
miniature from the Trcs Riches Henres ; by 
the Van Limboiugs (Musee Conde, Chan- 
tilly). [c] The Presentation of the Virgin, 
drawing after Taddeo Gaddi (Louvre) . 145 

Plate II— [a] Page from a book of designs by 
Giovannino de' Grassi (Biblioteca Mnnici- 
pale, Bergamo). [r1 L'Hallili dn Sanglier, 
miniature from the Trcs Riches Hemes ; by 
the Van Limbourgs (Miisee Conde, Chan- 

tilly) 14S 

Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections — 
XIX — Paintings attributed to Lucas van 
Leyden : — 

Plate — [a] Martyrdom of St. Sebastian. 
[b] Judgment of Titns ManliusTorquatus (?). 
[cj Co nmimion of Herkenbald (?) ; (all in 
Hampton Court Palace), [d] A Minister 
Preaching (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam) 
X'incent van Gogh — II : — 

Pictures by Vincent van Gogh : — 

Plate I — Portrait de 1' Artiste, a la Pipe . 

Plate II — Le Ravin, Aries . . . • 

Plate II — Les .'\liscamps (Les Parains). From 
photographs taken by M. E. Druet, 108 
Faubourg St. Honore, Paris. 
Towards a Grouping of Chinese Porcelain — II :— 
Plate I — [a and c] Vases, underglaze blue 
porcelain, bottle, late Ming style (South 
Kensington Museum), [b] Vase, Imperial 
Factory, Wan Li or T'ien Ch'i (?) (Kunstge- 
werbe Museum, Berlin), [d] Bowl, late 
Wan Li (South Kensington Museum) . 

Plate II— Late Ming Style, [a, c, d, e] Covered 
Ewers, [b] Vase (collection of late NIr. Robert 

Hoe, New York) 

Giovanni Caroto — II : — 

Works by Giovanni Caroto : — 

Plate I — [a] Portrait of the Artist and his wife 
Placidia (detail) (Museo Civico, Verona), [b] 
Portrait of the Artist (Biblioteca Com- 
munale, Verona) . . . . . .177 

Plate II— [a] Madonna Enthroned, St. 
Catherine and St. Paul with Donors 
(Mezzane di Sotto, near X'erona). [c] 
Sketch of Verona ; from outside Porto San 
Zeno (?) (Biblioteca Communale, Verona). 
[b] By Francesco Caroto, The Archangel 
Michael (detail) (Museo Civico, X'erona) . 180 
The Master of the Amsterdam Cabinet and 
two new Works by his hand : — 
Works by the Master : — 
Plate I — A Young Cavalier and Lady (Uni- 
versity Library, Erlangen) . . . .185 






Pl.ate II— [a] St. Martin, engraving. ["] *'^" 
Archer, [u and c] Ladies Walking ; by the 
School of the Master (dr.awings in University 
Library, Erlangen). [e] The lilxhortation ; by 
the Master (Kupferstichkabinet, lierlin) 
A Portrait of Leonello d'P2sle by Roger van der 
Weyden (in the possession of Messrs. 

P. and D. Colnaghi) 

.A Portrait of Leonello d'Este by Roger van der 
Weyden. Coat of Arms on the reverse side 

of the Portrait 

Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections—XX :- 

The Equestrian Portraits of Charles I by Van 

Dyck (Buckingham Palace), (The National 

Gallery) .....■• 

A 'Sacra Conversazione' in the Hermitage :— 

Pictures by Previtali, or here ascribed to him [a] 

Madonna and Child with a kneeling Donor 

(National Gallery) ; [b] Detail of the Holy 

Family with two Donors and their Patrons 

(Imperial Gallery, Vienna) ; fc] Madonna 

and Child with a Danor (Museo Municipale, 

Padua) ; [u] Mad mna and Child with two 

Donors (The Hermitage, St. Petersburg) . 

Ox-yokes in the North of Portugal ; — 

Contemporary Ox-yokes of antique design still 
used in the North of Portugal. Pair-yokes 
used [a] on the banks of the Miuho, [b] in 
in the neighbourhood of Oporto, [c] in the 
extreme north. Single-yokes [d and e] 
The Furniture of the Gillow Cost-books— II:— 
Plate I— The Carlton House Table, [a] com- 
pleted, [b] working design 
Plate II— [a] Fitted Dressing-table, [b] Vase 
Knife-case, [c] Mahogany Sideboard 
Monvaerni and Montbas. 
Two Fourteenth Century Chests. 

The inscription read as ' Monvaerni ' and 

Two Fourteenth Century Chests ; [a] probably 
English (whereabouts unknown), [b] the 
French Chest of the Musee de Cluny 
The New Mantegua in the Louvre : — 
The SI. Sebastian, from Aigue-Perse 
Drawing by Andrea Mantegna .... 
Two Drawings by Andrea Mantegna in the 
Boymans Museum of Rotterdam :— 
Plate— Drawing by Andrea Mantegna . 
Classical Influence on the Italian Medal :— 
Plate I— All from specimens in the British 
Museum, except Nos. 5, 8 and the centre 
drawing, [i] Medal of Q. Remmius Palae- 
mon, by Camillo Mariani. [2] Gold Augus- 
tale of Frederick II. [3] Copper coin of 
Ragusa, thirteenth century. [5] Medal of 
Francis I, Carrara (Berlin Museum). [6] 
Sestettius of Trajan. [7] Medal of Lorenzo 
de' Medici, ascribed to Bertoldo. [8] Gem 
by Athenion (Naples Cabinet). [9] Reverse 
of Sestertius of Hadrian. [10] of 
Paul II, here ascribed to Aristotile da 
Bologna (Biblioth^que Nationale, Paris). 
[11] Reverse of medal of Alfonso d'Este, 

1 1)8 







LIST OF PLATES — continued 


[Centre] Drawing by- 
la Salle Collection, the 

by Niccolo Spinelli. 
Pisanello (His de 

Louvre) 263 

Plite II— Medals and testoons, all, except 
No. I, from specimens in the British 
Museum, [ij Lodovico Scarampi, ascribed 
to Cristoforo Geremia (South Kensington 
Museum). [2] Augustus, by Cristoforo 
Geremia. [3] Augustus. [4] Alexander the 
Great. [5] Priam. [6] Artemisia ; all four 
ascribed to Cesati. [7] Reverse of medal 
of Paul III, by Cesati. [8] Dido, ascribed to 
Cesati. [9] Augustus, by Cavino of Padua. 
[10] Testoon of Giovanni II Bentivoglio, 
by Francia. [11] Augustus; North Itahan 
work, circ. 1500. [12] Testoon of Gian- 
galeazzo Maria Sforza ..... 266 
On a Portrait Drawing by Hans Holbein ; — 
Plate — Portraits of Sir Charles Wingheld, Kt. ; 

[a] (Windsor Castle); [b] (Sir John Leslie). 271 
Studies in Composition : — 

Plate — [a] Victory of Samothrace (Louvre). 

[b] Mount Fuji, by Hokusai. [c] Les Premiers 
Pas, by J. F. Millet (Luxembourg, Paris) . 274 

The Technique of Greek and Roman Weaving: — 
Plate — [a] Fragments of Greek ornamental 
weaving, 5th cent. (Hermitage), [b] Frag- 
ment Egypto- Roman tapestry, 3rd or 4th 
cent. A.D. [c] Detail, i6th cent. Brussels 

tapestry (S. K. M.) 279 

Portrait of an Ecclesiastic by Diego Velazquez, 
Collection of the Marques de la Vega-Inclan : — 
Plate — The newly-discovered picture . . 285 
On a Newly-discovered Portrait by Rembrandt : 

Plate — Portrait of Johan van Echten . . 288 
Francesco Napoletano — 

Plate — [a] Madonna and Child (Brera) ; [a] 
Madonna and Child (Mr. H. Morison, 
U.S.A.) ; [c] Madonna and Child with SS. 
John and Sebastian (Zurich) ; [d] Madonna 
and Child (New York Historical Society) ; 
all by Francesco Napoletano . . .291 
Portrait of a Lady, by Alesso Baldovinetti, 

National Gallery 308 

On a Profile Portrait by Baldovinetti : — 

Plate — Madonna and Child, by Alesso Bal- 
dovinetti, Louvre . . . , 313 
Diirer and the Housebook Master : — 

Plates I, II and III — Eighteen Drawings and 
Engravings by these artists . 316,319,322 

33 1 



Genoese Lintel- Reliefs in Chios: — 

Plate I — St. George ; [a] The Museum, Chios, 
[b] Church of Santa, [c] Museum, Chios. 
The Annunciation ; [d] Church of St. John 
the Baptist, Chios, [e] Church of St. Pha- 
nourios, near Nea Moni. The Triumphal 
Entry, \y\ Church of Chalkios . . 325 
Plate II— Doorway at Chalkios with the Tri- 
umphal Entry Relief. St. George ; South 
Kensington Museum. The Annunciation ; 
South Kensington Museum , . . 328 
Plato's ' Atlantis ' re-discovered : — 
Plate — Terra-cotta Head from He, British Mus- 
eum ; [a] full face, [b"] profile. Bronze 
Sacred Head, Olukun, Ife [c] full face, [dJ 
profile, with its Guardian Priest 
Old Marcasite Jewellery : — 

Plate — Various old Marcasite Ornaments 
The Emblem of St. Ansano : — 

Plate — St. Ansano ; [a] P^resco by Tiberio 
d'Assisi, Mr. Gellatly's Collection ; [b] Detail 
from the Annunciation with SS. Ansano 
and Giulitta, by Simone Martini Uffizi ; [cj 
Fresco by Matteo da Gualdo Capella dci 

Pellegrini, Assisi 339 

An Unpublished Picture by Bartolomeo 
Montagna: — 
Plate — Pictures by Montagna. St. Jerome ; 

[a] Poldi-Pezzoli, Milan ; [b] Raccolta 
Morelli, Accademia Carrara, Bergamo ; 
[d] here lirst ascribed to Montagna and 
hitherto to Carpaccio .... 34J 

Towards a Grouping of Chinese Porcelain— 
Plate I— K'ang-hsi Porcelain in Blue Under- 
glaze: [a] Tiger-lily Group, [b and c] 
Kekemono Group ; South Kensington 
Museum, Salting Collection, [d] Parsley 
Group, [e] Panel Group, [f and gJ Hirado 
Group, [hJ Master of the Cross-hatched 
Designs ; the late Mr. Robert Hoe's 

Collection, New York 3^7 

Plate II— [a and b] K'ang-hsi Porcelain in 
Blue Underglaze ; the late Mr. Robert Hoe's 
Collection, New York : [a] the Panel Group ; 

[b] the Parsley Group, [c] K'ang-hsi 
Porcelain in Blue Underglaze (Early) ; Mr. 
W. G. Rawlinson's Collection, [d] Base 
of Early K'ang-hsi Plate showing groove 
(with section) ; Mrs. Halsey's Collection . 350 


V (. 



HE holiday season allov 
even art critics to 
the National G;'' 
will find 

in nrrant-r. 

ng thi 

i Mcy 


■ 'y labels 
e not 




quatt; ich the feeling for tl; 

unity and richness of the decorative ele- 
ment? in design is so intense as to 
compensate for the absence of dramatic 
purpose. The Michael Angelo looks even 
grander than before, and the whole effect 
V f the room is rendered better by the ampler 
spacing of the pictures. Even apart from 
the fact that Sir Charles Holroyd has 
almost always placed the right emphasis 
in his arrangement, the mere fact of oc- 
casionally changing the position of pictures 
is helpful by enabling us to get fresh ideas 
of the'> vnhies. One may even foresee a 
distal hen museums possessing 

h sumption of the Vtrgir, io 

Botticelli, and yet '\.t. still bears his name, 
and the same may be said of the tondo 
No. 275. Meanwhile two very important 
and universally recognized Botticellis, the 
circular Adoration No. 1033 and the ex- 
tremely interesting and beautiful early 
work, also an Adoration^ No. 11 24, ai'- ^'in 
given to Filippino Lippi. 

Other less glaring instances may be cited : 
the continued attribution to Bellini of the 
Madonna by Montagna, No, 1696 ; of the 
Betrothal^ 1434, to Velazquez; of the .por- 
trait of a Lady, No. 758, to Piero della 
Francesca ; of the portraits Nos. k} 

tU in favour of a cc 

:re oi iU'i-hi . 
p L> •_:;.. ' ■ . . J ci sniliar with the _^ • ■:,! .. c , 
names (lioni text books) and is anxious to 
appreciate the pictures with some intelli- 
gence. It is inevitable that such people 
must, as things are now, have all their 

iiic work.-> vvc liave Cited are cases in 
.viiich no serious authorities would be 
likely to disagree, and where we must 
suppose the old labels to have been retained 
merely through want of attention. We 
venture to think th?t the present changes 

THt Bt:iU-i>.vi!0> .'•lAuAXlNE, No. 91. Vol. XVI 11. —October, 1910. 


HE holiday season allows 
even art critics to visit 
the National Gallery. 
They will find many 
changes in arrangement 
accomplished, and others 
m progress. Taking the Italian school 
first, Sir Charles Holroyd's rehanging 
of the first (Italian) room is excellent. 
Uccello's great battle-piece is brought 
out from the hiding place where it has 
lurked for so long and is seen at last 
for what it is, one of the most resplendent 
and characteristic works of the Florentine 
quattrocento in which the feeling for the 
unity and richness of the decorative ele- 
ments in design is so intense as to 
compensate for the absence of dramatic 
purpose. The Michael Angelo looks even 
grander than before, and the whole effect 
cf the room is renderedbetter by the ampler 
spacing of the pictures. Even apart from 
the fact that Sir Charles Holroyd has 
almost always placed the right emphasis 
in his arrangement, the mere fact of oc- 
casionally changing the position of pictures 
is helpful by enabling us to get fresh ideas 
of their values. One may even foresee a 
distant future when museums possessing 
almost all the great masterpieces of the 
past will never display all their trea- 
sures at once, but will bring them out a 
few at a time, giving to each its ideally 
perfect setting, and so avoid the dulled 
edge of familiarity. While these changes 
are in progress we should like to put in a 
plea for that public, even now a numerous 
one, which cannot hope to master all the 
voluminous literature of art-history ; a 
public which is familiar with the greater 
names (from text books) and is anxious to 
appreciate the pictures with some intelli- 
gence. It is inevitable that such people 
must, as things are now, have all their 

ideas confused by the misleading labels 
still left upon the frames. We are not 
pleading for any revolutionary changes or 
for the official recognition of the latest 
and most hypothetical speculations of con- 
noisseurs, but merely that where, either by 
documentary proof or on unmistakeable 
evidence of style there is a general con- 
sensus of opinion among competent art- 
historians, the public should have the 
benefit of the knowledge which has thus 
attained a definite basis. No one would, 
we suppose, venture in any serious publi- 
cation to defend the ascription of the large 
Assumption of the Virgin, No. 1126, to 
Botticelli, and yet it still bears his name, 
and the same may be said of the tondo 
No. 275. Meanwhile two very important 
and universally recognized Botticellis, the 
circular Adoration No. 1033 and the ex- 
tremely interesting and beautiful early 
work, also an Adoration, No. 1 1 24, are still 
given to Filippino Lippi. 

Other less glaring instances may be cited : 
the continued attribution to Bellini of the 
Madonna by Montagna, No. 1696 ; of the 
Betrothal, 1434, to Velazquez ; of the por- 
trait of a Lady, No. 758, to Piero della 
Francesca ; of the portraits Nos. 1230 and 
2490 to Ghirlandajo ; of the Rape of Helen, 
No. 591, to Gozzoli, of Nos. 580 and 
580A to Jacopo Landini. 

We are all in favour of a conservative 
attitude on the part of the officials in 
the matter of attributions — of such non- 
committal labels as ' Tuscan school,' and of 
the liberal use of question marks where 
no consensus of opinion has been reached ; 
but the works we have cited are cases in 
which no serious authorities would be 
likely to disagree, and where we must 
suppose the old labels to have been retained 
merely through want of attention. We 
venture to think that the present changes 

Th« Burlington Magazine, No. 91. Vol. xvi 11. —October, 1910. 

The National Gallery 

of arrangement afford a good opportunity 
to remedy this defect. 

May wc also suggest the advantages 
which would accrue to more serious students 
of art by following, in future editions of the 

catalogue, the admirable example set at 
Budapest, where the catalogue gives, in 
the briefest form, the various attributions 
of responsible critics in the case of pictures 
of uncertain attribution. 


^Y the death of Holman 
Hunt we lose almost the 
last of the pre-Raphaelites, 
■almost the last personal link 
I with the most remarkable 
'artistic movement that 
England has ever known. One may even 
wonder whether Holman Hunt's vigorous 
and powerful personality would have found 
its complete expression in art at any other 
time than that which saw so intense an 
outburst of faith and zeal. To that faith 
of hisyouth Holman Hunt was consistently 
and conspicuously loyal, though his zeal 
led him, perhaps, to place upon its dogmas 
too narrow a construction. Two distinct 
ideas of art w^ere embodied in the pre- 
Raphaelite movement, the conception of 
primitive expressive design, and the idea 
of minute realistic representation. It was 
the latter conception that appealed to 
Holman Hunt's positive nature, and at the 
and of his life he minimized the import- 
ence of the other motive. Yet how 
greatly it influenced him at one time may 
be seen by the drawing of Claudio and 
Isabella which marks the climax of his 
imaginative power. Only the influence 
of Rossetti could have stimulated him to 
such concentration and dramatic energy. 

Reacting as he did against this influence, 
he found himself less able to fuse into 
pure artistic form the elaborately intel- 
lectual and allusive content of his ideas. 
He tried with heroic constancy to achieve 
persuasive realization by the endless accu- 
mulation of facts, of form and colour; facts 
which, however relevant to a purely 
historical or intellectual point of view, 
were not always consistent with imagina- 
tive necessity. In such works, however, 
as his portrait of himself in the Uffizi, 
where no such conflict presented itself, he 
achieved a splendid success upon a more 
prosaic plane. Indeed, wherever the basic 
idea was not too complex or too remote 
from artistic expression, Holman Hunt's 
vigorous and learned craftsmanship gave 
to his imagery a peculiar strength and 

In view of the great importance of 
Holman Hunt's powerful personality in 
the development of nineteenth-century art 
in England, it is greatly to be desired that 
a few really typical examples of his work 
should be acquired for the National 
Gallery, where at present he is repre- 
sented by a single work, which, whatever 
its merits, can hardly be regarded as 


N May, 1853, a remarkable col- 
lection of paintingsof the Spanish 
school, belonging to Louis 
•s\,,.;^ Philippe, the exiled King of the 
^^'^^V French, acquired chiefly from the 
Icollection of Mr. Standish, was 
^^^^^dispersed at Christie's, when 
jT'^lseveral Spanish portraits were 

purchased by Queen Victoria. These portraits, 
which remain for the most part at Buckingham 
Palace, are of varying interest, but they com- 
prise some few of greater artistic value than 
may have been supposed at the time of their 
purchase. Noteworthy among these is a portrait 
on panel, which bore the name of Prince Albert 
of Austria, and was attributed to Sir Anthony 
More. When these portraits were carefully 
examined and rearranged a few years ago, it was 
evident that this portrait was wrongly named, and 
that it really represented Philip II in his younger 
days, as Infant of Spain and Duke of Brabant. 
In view of this interesting discovery, and the fact 
that Philip is represented wearing the Order of the 
Golden Fleece, this portrait was among those lent 
by King Edward VII to the Exhibition of the 
Golden Fleece at Bruges in 1907. There the 
portrait was at once recognized as a true likeness 
of Philip at the age of twenty-two, and as an 
early and important work of the painter, Antonio 
Moro, of Utrecht [Plate I, a]. 

The name of Antonio Moro, or Sir Anthony 
More, as he is usually styled in England, has been 
applied somewhat recklessly to numerous portraits 
of the later Tudor period, scattered about private 
collections in England and Scotland. The greater 
part of these ascriptions is erroneous, though as a 
matter of fact there are a larger number of 
original and striking works by this important 
painter in England than in any other country. A 
notice of the painter was contributed to the ' Dic- 
tionary of National Biography' by the present 
writer, in which it was soughtto prove that, although 
the name of Sir Anthony More is so freely used 
in England, his actual work in this country was 
confined to his visit and commission to paint the 
portrait of Queen Mary Tudor in 1553, prior to 
the queen's marriage to Philip II. Recently an 
important biography of Antonio Moro has been 
published, compiled by M. Henri Hymans,i for- 
merly so well known to all students and connois- 
seurs as the keeper of the Department of Prints, 
and later as chief librarian of the Royal Library at 
Brussels. It is, perhaps, fortunate that so important 
a biography should have been left open for so 

"Antonio Moro, Son Oeuvre et son Temps,' par Henri 
Hymans. Brussels ; G. van Oest. 1910. 

experienced and so learned a writer as M. Hymans, 
who has been able to bring into his work a wealth 
of historical and artistic learning such as few 
writers can hope to have the opportunity to 
acquire. We may say shortly that the book 
amply sustains M. Hymans's reputation, and will 
for long be the standard work of reference upon a 
painter and a period of art -history both of which 
have hitherto received but scanty and superficial 

Little is known about the birth and parentage 
of Antonio Moro. Van Mander, who knew 
personally Moro's children, as well as his pupil 
Ferreris, could get no information, and M. Hymans, 
in spite of access to all avenues of documentary 
research, has been able to add very little to Van 
Mander's account. Anthony, or Anthonis, Mor 
was born at Utrecht somewhere about 1519, and 
was a pupil of the famous painter Jan van Scorel. 
His own self-portraits in later days show a figure of 
remarkable distinction, which suggests a parentage 
of superior degree, but evidence is entirely lacking. 
He came under the influence of Scorel after the 
Italianization of that painter's art, and was strongly 
affected thereby. A portrait in the Stockholm 
Museum bears Moro's name and the date 1538 on a 
label pasted on the back, but is stated to resemble 
the work of Joost Van Cleef rather than that of 
Moro. In 1541 there is a painting signed by Moro, 
now in the Kunstliefde Museum at Utrecht, repre- 
senting five members of the Order of St. John of 
Jerusalem. This belongs to a series of similar 
paintings intimately connected with the life of 
Scorel, and to yet another series belongs the double 
portrait of two Canons of Utrecht, dated 1544, 
now in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum at Berlin. 
According to Van Mander, Moro went at an early 
age to Italy, and visited Rome, as a pupil of Scorel 
might be expected to do. In 1547 he was received 
3.S franc-ma?ire in the Guild of St. Luke at Utrecht, 
under the dean-ship of Cornells Floris, on the same 
day as Abraham Ortelius, the geographer. In 
September, 1548, the Emperor Charles V came 
to Brussels from the Diet of Augsburg, and was 
joined a few months later by his son Philip, then 
Duke of Brabant and King of Naples, and his sister 
Mary, Queen of Hungary, regent of the Nether- 
lands. In attendance on the Emperor were Antoine 
Perrenot, Bishop of Arras, famous in history 
as Cardinal Granvelle, and Ferdinand Alvarez de 
Toledo, immortal in history as the Duke of Alva. 

With these dates the career of Antonio Moro 
may be said to begin. The pages of M. Hymans's 
biography become a historical record of the deep- 
est interest, and a majestic procession of heroes 
and heroines pass across the stage, illustrating 

Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections 

tliroiigh the consummate skill of Moro's art those 
patjes of history which iiave become familiar to 
modern readers in the fascinating volumes by 
John Lothrop Motley. It is clear that the painter's 
first patron was Cardinal Granvelle, and that it was 
through this patron that he became known to Mary 
of Hungary, and eventually to Philip, to say 
nothing of the great emperdi- himself. M. Hymans 
tells us^ that Moro was at Brussels in attendance 
on Granvelle, that he was in a position to advance 
money to a fellow artist, that he iiad assistants, 
named Conrad Schot and Jan Maes, and that the 
Spanish painter, Alonso Sanchez Coello, was 
Moro's pupil at Brussels, Moro being then about 
thirty years of age. The portrait of Granvelle, 
painted by Moro at this date, was subsequently 
owned by Rubens and is now at Vienna. To this 
date also belong the portrait of Philip at Buck- 
ingham Palace, already alluded to, and the almost 
precisely similar portrait of Philip in the collection 
of Earl Spencer at Althorp. M. Hymans, in agree- 
ment with a recent study of Moro's work by Dr. 
von Loga of Berlin, is inclined to see in the Althorp 
version of this portrait, reproduced in M. Hymans's 
book, the original, and in the Buckingham Palace 
portrait, here reproduced, a copy by another hand. 
It is difficult to agree absolutely with this decision, 
inasmuch as the Buckingham Palace version is 
in some points executed with such knowledge 
of modelling and characterization as to raise it 
above the rank of a mere copy. The technique, 
mannerisms, and other details are all Moro's own, 
and the Althorp version seems in the reproduction 
given by M. Hymans to be lacking in the vitality 
wliich pervades the Buckingham Palace version. 
In 1550 Moro was back in Rome in the service 
of Cardinal Granvelle, for whom he executed a 
copy of Titian's Danac, but this visit was cut 
short by a command from Mary of Hungary (as 
M. Hymans proves, and not by Charles V) to go 
to Madrid, and thence to Lisbon, in order to paint 
the portrait of the King of Portugal's sister, Dona 
Maria, niece of Charles V, who was then destined 
to be the second wife of her cousin, Philip. Gran- 
velle writing to the sculptor, Leoni, about June, 
1550, says that ' La tres pleuse reine a envoye mon 
peintre en Portugal.' Moro painted this portrait 
and others of the royal family at Lisbon, and 
returned to Madrid ,where he now became estab- 
hshed as the painter of the Hapsburg royal 
house in Spain. Either before or immediately 
after his journey to Lisbon he painted Maximilian, 
King of Bohemia, the future emperor, and in the 
next year his wife, Mary of Austria, and her sister, 
J nana, wife of Prince John of Portugal, the 
daughters of Charles V. Among the Spanish por- 
traits at Buckingham Palace is a good portrait of 
Doiia Juana [plate i, b], ascribed to Coello, but 
which is quite in the manner of Moro, and evi- 
dently executed at the same time as the portrait of 

her sister, the Queen of Bohemia, now in the Prado, 
and reproduced by M. Hymans. For a year 
or two Moro appe us to have been backwards and 
forwards between Rome, Genoa and Madrid, but in 
1553 he was sent on an even more important 

M. Hymans shows clearly that it was again on a 
commission from Mary of Hungary, and not from 
her brother, Charles V, that Antonio Moro was 
sent to England to take the portrait of Queen 
Mary Tudor. The Portuguese marriage had been 
broken off and a new important alliance promoted 
by the ambitious regent of the Netherlands. She 
it was who sent the painter to England, where he 
painted the world-famous portrait of Mary Tudor, 
which remained in Mary of Hungary's possession, 
and subsequently came to the royal family of 
Spain, and thus to the Prado Gallery at Madrid. 
This portrait, with its numerous repetitions, is too 
well known to need any description here. M. 
Hymans is of opinion that Moro remained in 
England until the arrival of Philip and the royal 
marriage at Winchester in 1554. Possibly the 
Spanish ambassador, Simon Renard, whose por- 
trait Moro painted in 1553, retained him in 
England, but no portraits of the English court 
and nobility at this date can safely be ascribed to 
Moro. M. Hymans quotes two portraits of Sir 
Henry Sydney and his wife at Petworth, painted 
in 1553, as by Moro, but there seems to be a 
serious obstacle to this ascription. Lady Sydney 
was the daughter of John Dudley, Duke of 
Northumberland, protagonist in the short-lived 
reign of Lady Jane Grey and Queen Mary's 
deadliest enemy, who had suffered on the scaffold 
but a short time before Moro's arrival in England. 
The Sydneys were in disgrace at Court, and 
though Sir Henry Sydney recovered his position, 
and was sent as envoy to Spain, where he became 
high in favour with Philip II, this was not until 
after Moro's visit. It is difficult to believe that a 
painter, attached to the Spanish embassy, could at 
this date have been employed openly by one, 
who had belonged to Lady Jane Grey's faction. 

According to tradition in England, which 
always speaks of Antonio Moro as Sir Anthony 
More, the painter was knighted by Queen Mary 
for his services on this occasion, but there is no 
record of this event. He returned, as M. Hymans 
shows, from England to the Netherlands, taking 
Queen Mary's portrait to the regent, and painting 
the regent's portrait on hisarrival. In the following 
year there occurred one of the most dramatic 
scenes in history, the abdication of the Emperor 
Charles V at Brussels, soon to be followed by the 
division of the empire between his son, Philip and 
his brother Ferdinand. This famous event has 
been often described. It can hardly be doubted 
that Moro was present, and from portraits executed 
by his masterly brush a series of illustrations to 

r. < 

< X 

y. o 

X >J w 

M <: E 
^ >■ < 

< 5 


^^BL "^ 



^^f ^^ ^^"^1 


■ ■ 

■ w '^m 


^^H "v-. '^KK^^ 

^^^L ^^i^BK -' iv'-' '^^^^^^H 







^^M Jk 





Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections 

the scene could easily be made. William of 
Orange, on whose arm the weary emperor leaned 
for support, and who was eventually to wreck 
the Spanish power in the Netherlands, was twice 
painted by Moro (at Cassel and The Hague) ; 
Alva, his renowned rival, also twice (Huntington 
Collection, New York — from the Townshend 
Collection — and Brussels); Philip II more than 
once; Mary of Hungary, Margaret of Parma, 
Alessandro Farnese, her son (then a boy, as in the 
portrait at Parma), Simon Renard, Granvelle — in 
fact, most of the chief figures in this act of the 
world's drama have been handed down to us by 
the art of Moro, just as those of the Court of 
Charles I are known to us through their portraits 
by Van Dyck. 

Moro was now the painter most in favour with 
Philip II, and in attendance on his royal patron on 
more than one occasion in Spain, not merely as 
a portrait-painter, but as a history-painter, for as 
M. Hymans tells us, he was employed by Philip to 
copy Titian's paintings at Madrid. He appears, 
however, to have made his actual home in his native 
town of Utrecht, with his wife, whose Christian 
name, Metgen, alone is known. He was a man of 
some wealth and acquired a property, so that he was 
known as Moro van Dashorst, as was his son, 
Philip, who became a Canon at Utrecht. He 
had also at least two married daughters. In 1560 
Moro painted his former master, Jan van Scorel, 
then an aged Canon at Utrecht, who died two years 
later, when the portrait by Moro was placed above 
Scorel's tomb as an epitaph. This striking portrait 
is now in the collection of the Society of Antiquaries 
in London, and M. Hymans is fully justified in 
claiming comparison between this portrait of 
Scorel and that of L'Hoinine a VOeillet by Jan van 
Eyck. At Utrecht, Brussels or Antwerp Moro 
found a new patron in Margaret of Parma, now 
regent of the Netherlands. Both the third and 
fourth queens of Philip II were painted by him, 
Elisabeth of Valois(M. Bischoffsheim's collection) 
and Anne of Austria (Imperial Gallery, Vienna). 
In the last years of his life Moro was settled at 
Antwerp, where he died in 1576, shortly after 
completing the remarkable portrait of Hubert 
Goltzius, the antiquary and historian (Brussels 

Among the portraits painted by Moro, which have 
formed part of English collections, the most 
famous are probably those of Sir Thomas Gresham, 
the famous merchant-prince and founder of the 
Royal Exchange in London. The fact that at 
least five important portraits of Gresham can be 
safely attributed to the hand of Moro has been 
used as a proof of Moro's continued residence in 
England. Sir Thomas Gresham without doubt 
played a large part in the life of Antonio Moro, 
but not in England. Gresham's active business 
life was spent as much at Antwerp as in London 

from about 1550 onwards. He was in communi- 
cation with the regent, Mary of Hungary and 
Cardinal Granvelle, Moro's principal patrons, and 
was one of the principal agents in the Spanish 
marriage, while he paid at least one visit in 1554 to 
Spain. The portraits of Gresham by, or attributed 
to, Moro fall into three groups. The first, dated 
1550, represents him at a fairly advanced age, 
standing behind a table on which he rests his 
hands ; the portrait now in the Hermitage of St. 
Petersburg was formerly in Sir Robert Walpole's 
collection at Houghton, as is well known from an 
engraving in the Houghton Gallery. M. Hymans 
points out most justly that the age of the person 
here represented, precludes the possibility of the 
portrait being that of Sir Thomas Gresham in 1550. 
The accuracy of this date would seem to be estab- 
lished by the fact that an exact replica of this 
portrait with the same date exists at Enville Hall. 
Staffordshire, in the collection of Lady Grey, form- 
erly that of the Earls of Stamford and Warrington. 
Both the subject and the authorship of these 
interesting portraits must therefore remain a matter 
of doubt. M. Hymans reproduces the fine portrait 
by Moro of Sir Thomas Gresham in the National 
Portrait Gallery, authenticated by a contemporary 
engraving, of which as good a replica exists 
in Mercers' Hall, London. He notes that the 
handsome courtly gentleman here depicted gives 
a less vivid representation of the merchant prince, 
than does the portrait of Gresham seated in a 
chair, of which one version is also at St. Petersburg 
(from the Houghton collection) and another in 
the possession of Gresham's kinsman and repre- 
sentative, Mr. Granville Leveson-Gower, of Titsey 
Place. Another portrait of Gresham, by Moro, 
of equal excellence to the others, is in the possession 
of Sir Audley Neeld, Bart, at Grittleton Park. M. 
Hymans notes that the arm chair in which Sir 
Thomas Gresham is seated, and also his wife, in 
the companion portraits at St. Petersburg and 
Titsey, is the same chair shown in the fine pair of 
portraits by Moro, belonging to the Earl of 
Yarborough, absurdly named the Earl and Countess 
of Essex, and the anonymous portrait of a man by 
Moro belonging to Earl Amherst at Montreal. 
The fact of all these portraits having belonged to 
English collections would naturally lead to the 
assumption that Moro spent some time as a resident 
in England. This would seem to be corroborated 
by the fine and well known portrait of Sir Henry 
Lee, belonging to Viscount Dillon at Ditchley, 
signed and dated 1568 ; but M. Hymans quotes 
a document, communicated to him by Viscount 
Dillon, proving that Sir Henry Lee was at Antwerp 
in 1568 at the time of the Duke of Alva's cruel 
government. It is probable that Gresham was 
the agent who introduced many English sitters to 
Moro at Antwerp or Utrecht, as Gresham probably 
acted as banker and general friendly adviser to the 

1 1 

Notes on Pictures in the Royal Qollections 

English mcrcliaiits or aristocracy on business or 
on their travels. The suggestion tliat the fine 
portrait of a man in the Brunswick Gallery 
represents a professor of Oxford University does 
not appear to be capable of support. 

No one can see a portrait by Antonio Moro 
without being struck by the intense individuality 
of the painter and the penetrating seriousness with 
wliicii the subject is depicted. There is nothing 
flimsy, nothing superficially pleasing about these 
portraits. They are masterful renderings of strong 
natures, and their severity impresses rather than 
repels. Alva, for instance, reveals his whole 
character and illustrates his whole history in his 
two portraits by Moro, while as a delineator of 
the imperial house of Hapsburg Moro was only 
surpassed a half-century later by Velazquez. A 
comparison of the portraits by Moro with those 
by his pupil, Sanchez Coello, is very instructive. 
Coello's portraits are simple and straightforward, 
admirably executed, but seldom very interesting. 
Where Moro interprets, Coello simply reproduces. 
In Moro's portraits the richness of the costume is 
always subordinate to the likeness of the subject ; 
in those by Coello the costume sometimes seems 
the chief object of interest. Among the Spanish 
portraits at Buckingham Palace there are four 
portraits attributed to Coello ; two of these, por- 
traits of the Archdukes Rudolph and Ernest, 
sons of the Emperor Ferdinand I, are typical 
examples of Coello's work ; two others, those 
of Dona J nana of Austria, here reproduced, and 
of the young Archduke Wenceslaus of Austria, 
seem to be by a different hand, and more closely 
approach the style and mannerisms of Moro. 
These mannerisms are very obvious, and become, 
as with most portrait-painters, more marked, 
and somewhat over-accentuated, as the painter's 
career progresses. The head is poised at a 
particular angle and the ear set rather high 
on the head as if to escape the high tight-filting 
collars then in vogue. The ear also has a ten- 
dency to be pointed, rather like a faun's, a very 
remarkable characteristic of Moro's work. There 
is a certain nobility, even swagger, in the pose 
of some of the figures, such as is found later 
in the portraits by Frans Hals, and if we may 
judge from Moro's self-portraits, this was an echo 
of his own personality, as may be seen in the case 
of Van Dyck. 

In the actual technique of his art Moro had, 
moreover, certain peculiarities, which serve as 
a guide to the authenticity of his paintings. 

As a history-painter Moro has left but little 
mark. It is evident that he executed several 
paintings of sacred and mythological subjects 
for his royal patrons and for public commis- 
sions at Antwerp and Utrecht. One such 
painting, signed and dated 1556, reproduced by 
M. Hymans, is now in a private collection at 
Nimeguen, but was mentioned by Lampsonius, 
an intense admirer of Moro's art, and by Vasari. 
It represents Jesus Clirist aflcr His Rcsnrnrlioii be- 
tii'ccit St. Peter and St. Paul, ivith tivo angels above. 
The composition is clumsy, in the heavy Italianized 
manner of the Utrecht school, and the influence 
of Titian is very apparent. The body of Christ is, 
however, well-modelled, and evidently a study from 
the life. Among the subject-paintings by Moro, 
catalogued in 162 1 in the imperial collection at 
Prague, there is mentioned a picture of St. Sebastian. 
In the possession of Mr. Lesser there is a remark- 
able painting of a young man, nude, and holding 
a bow and arrow, evidently a St. Sebastian. Various 
painters have been suggested, some Northern, some 
Italian. It has, however, been pointed out by Mr. 
Roger Fry that a close examination reveals some 
of the technical mannerisms which are always 
present in Moro's work and peculiar to him. By 
the kindness of Mr. Lesser we are able to reproduce 
this interesting painting [Frontispiece]. A simi- 
lar painting, unfortunately in bad condition, is in 
the collection of the Earl of Darnley at Cobham 
Hall, showing the same admirable modelling of 
the nude, studied evidently in both cases from the 
living model as in the case of the Christ at Nime- 
guen. As these two versions of St. Sebastian 
differ from that usually adopted by the Church, 
it may be suggested that they were painted for 
some of the numerous Archer-Guilds in the 
Netherlands, of which St. Sebastian was the patron 
saint. England, as M. Hymans notes, has always 
been an admirer of Moro's work, and some of the 
best examples are to be found in British collections, 
such as those of the Earl of Yarborough, Earl 
Amherst, Earl Spencer and Sir Frederick Cook. 
A remarkable pair of portraits, dated 1551, which 
are very good examples of Moro's early work, now 
in the collection of the Marquess of Lothian at 
Newbattle Abbey, have been reproduced here by 
permission of the trustees [Plate II]. The 
National Gallery has only one example of Moro's 
work, excellent as a painting, but hardly of first- 
rate importance as an illustration of his art. The 
publication of M. Hymans's book will surely 
enhance the reputation of this remarkable painter. 




HE large medal which is 
illustrated on Plate I, A, 
was recently acquired by Mr. 
Rosenheim, who recognized 
its importance, on account 
not so much of any beauty 
it may possess as of the place 
which it takes in the work 
of a well-known craftsman. The remarks which 
follow,! both on the medal itself and on the 
attribution of other medals to the same artist, 
are essentially due to Mr. Rosenheim, at whose 
wish I lay them before the readers of this maga- 

The medal is of lead, without reverse. It re- 
presents the bust, turned to the right, of Ercole II 
d'Hste, fourth Duke of Ferrara, Modena and 
Reggio. He wears a cuirass, on the breast of 
which is a grotesque mask, somewhat resembling 
a panther's. The piece measures 137 mm. in 
diameter. The inscription is HER • II • DVX • 
PER • nil • MVT- ET • REG, but the stops, 
instead of being mere points, are of the triskeles 
shape ; and at the beginning of the inscription is 
an ornament which appears to be a pine cone, or 
something of the kind. 

This medal has already been known for some 
time in an incomplete form. Armand described,- 
as the work of an anonymous artist a specimen 
in his own collection, measuring only 133 mm., to 
which an alien reverse had been added. A speci- 
men of this hybrid was recently acquired by Mr. 
Rosenheim. The inscription on the obverse is 
blundered, III I being converted into I M. This 
is a mere mistake, and not to be regarded as an 
abbreviation of ' Imolae.' The reverse, with two 
mounted knights tilting at each other before a 
castle, seems to be a pure invention, and is not 
even medallic in style ; it may possibly have been 
suggested by an ivory-carving. 

Much more important than this hybrid is the 
admirable one-sided specimen without inscription 
in the Goethe Museum at Weimar. Armand 
describes it as a fine proof, on which the legend 
has disappeared, probably as the result of the 
chasing to which the piece has been subjected. 
So far as I know, the piece was first identihed in 
print as the work of Cellini by Dr. Carl Ruland.'' 

1 For the previous articles see Bdrlington Magazine, Vol. ix, 
p. 408 (September, IQ06); Vol. x, p. 3!<4 (March, 1907) ; Vol.xii, 
p. 141 (December, 1907); Vol. xiii, p. 274 (August, igo8) ; 
Vol. xiv, p. 210 (January, 1909); Vol. xv, pp. 31, 94 (April and 
May, 1909); Vol. xvi, p. 24 (October, 1909); Vol. xvii, p, 143 
(June, 1910). 

211, 147, I ; III, 218, a. In I, 147, 2, he mentions the passage 
in Cellini's 'Life,' witH which we shall deal presently, but 
remarks that the medal there described is unknown. 

^'Das Goethe-Nationalmuseum zu Weimar,' Sonderabdruck 
aus d. Jahrb. d. Kon, Akad. zu Erfurt, N.F., XXIV (1898), p. 18. 


A fine reproduction was subsequently published 
by Dr. Buchenau,* who pointed out that Armand 
was wrong in supposing that the inscription had 
been chased away. It had never been present. 
Concentric circles to guide the artist in placing 
his inscription had been incised on the model, and 
these are to be faintly seen on the proof. Dr. von 
Fabriczy ' gives a reduced illustration of the piece, 
remarking that the inscription was meant to be 
engraved on the proof, the concentric lines being 
intended to guide the engraver. Doubtless they 
would serve that purpose, but their primary object 
was to guide the artist in building up the lettering 
on the model itself." 

The diameter of the Weimar proof is 140 mm.' 
Mr. Rosenheim's lead measures 137 mm., a very 
small decrease from the diameter of the trial proof, 
considering the great size of the piece. Mr. 
Rosenheim, who has himself just examined the 
original at Weimar, considers that the loss in 
diameter may be due not to shrinkage, but to a 
trimming of the edge of the stone on which the 
model was worked, which reduced the diameter 
by about 2 mm. In any case the lead is a good 
and early cast, possibly made by the artist himself. 

The Weimar medal, as we have seen, has been 
recognized as the work of Benvenuto Cellini, and, 
indeed, as the obverse of the piece which he tells 
us he made in 1540, when he was at Ferrara, on 
his way to France. Here is the relevant portion 
of the passage in his autobiography' : — 

'The duke sent for me, and bade me take his 
portrait ; this I did upon a circular piece of black 
stone about the size of a little trencher. ... It 
took me eight days to complete his likeness ; then 
he ordered me to design the reverse. On it I 
modelled Peace, giving her the form of a woman 
with a torch in her hand, setting fire to a trophy 
of arms ; I portrayed her in an attitude of glad- 
ness, with very thin drapery, and below her feet 
lay Fury in despair, downcast and sad, and loaded 
with chains. . . . The duke . . . gave me inscrip- 
tions for both sides of the medal. That on the 
reverse ran as follows : Preliosa in coiispectn 
Dotnini; it meant that his peace with the Pope 
had been dearly bought.' Cellini adds that he 
took the medal, completed, to the duke before he 
went away. 

Various views have been expressed about this 

For reference to this, and to the article by Dr. Buchenau, to be 
mentioned immediately, we are indebted to Herr Lockner, of 
Wiirzburg. Dr. Ruland again called attention to the existence 
of the piece in the ' Frankfurter Zeitung' for November 3, 1900 
(cited by Dr. Buchenau). He noted that the mask on the breast 
of the cuirass was not quite finished in the proof. 

* ' Blatter fur Munzfreunde,' 1900, p. 156, and PI. I40, No. 5, 

5 'Italian Medals,' p. 145, PI. XXX, 4, 

'See Burlington Magazine, April, igog, p. 31. 

'Confirmed by Dr. von Oettingen. 'Thickness' in the 
English translation of Fabriczy is an obvious slip for ' diameter.' 

8 P. 255 in Bacci's edition ; I quote from Symonds's transla- 
tion, with a slight modification. 


Notes on Italian Medals 

medal by writers to whom its existence in any 
form was yet unknown : they may be read in 
Plon's work on ColHni (p. 202). It is hardly 
necessary to mention the theory that the piece 
was not a medal in our sense of the word, but a 
carving in black stone. Such works do not as a 
rule have reverses. The black stone about the 
size of a little trencher was of course a disc of 
slate, or something similar, such as we know was 
used by wax modellers for a modelling board.' 
The 'little trencher' {tagUerdlo da iavola) aptly 
describes the size of the piece which has come 
down to us. 

But what else is there to connect it with Cellini ? 
The mere fact that it is one side of a medal of 
Ercole II, corresponding more or less in size 
with one which Cellini says he made, is hardly 
enough. There is, however, something more ; if 
we compare the treatment of the relief in the head 
of the Duke, and the head in Cellini's medal of 
Clement VII [Plate II, k], the similarity of hand- 
ling is at once apparent. Most noticeable is the 
rather harsh way in which the relief fails to be 
modulated into the background ; the perpendicu- 
lar edge of the relief is especially perceptible in 
the noses of both heads. The comparative coarse- 
ness of rendering in the lead medal is no more 
than might be expected in a piece of this size by 
an artist accustomed to work on a smaller scale. 
In the Weimar specimen much of this coarseness 
has been removed by chasing. 

The description of the missing reverse repeats 
closely the account given by Cellini '" of the reverse 
of the medal already mentioned, which he made for 
Pope Clement VII in 1534. There too he repre- 
sented Peace as 'a slender woman, dressed in very 
thin drapery, gathered at the waist, with a little 
torch in her hand, setting fire to a heap of arms 
bound together like a trophy. In the background 
I had shown part of a temple, where was Discord 
chained with a load of fetters. Round about it 
ran a legend with these words: Clandnntur belli 
portae.' This is a common medal ; the specimen 
illustrated in PLATE II, A, is in the British Museum." 

The resemblance between this figure of Peace, 
as shown on the medal of Clement, and the 
figure of Prudence on a medal of Jean de Lorraine, 
Cardinal of Sant' Onofrio, has suggested'* that 
this latter medal is also from Cellini's hand [PLATE 
See Burlington Magazine, aun. cit., p. 32. 

'"Book I, Chapter LXX, in Symonds's translation. 

" Armand I, 148, 2. These medals, it should be remembered, 
are struck from dies, not cast like the medal of Ercole d'Este. 

'■- To J. Friedl.nnder, ' Munzen u. Med. des B. Cellini,' Berlin, 
1855, p. 7. Dr. Buchenau notes, as a point of connexion 
between this medal and the well-known medal of Bembo, that 
on both the word ' Cardinalis ' is abbreviated as 'Car.,' not 
• Card.' The point would be of more value if the medal of 
Bembo were quite certainly by Cellini, and if the same abbre- 
viation were not used by many other artists. See, for instance, 
Armand II, 109, 2 (Candida's medal of Giuliano della Revere) ; 
116,45 (medal of Francesco Alidosi) ; 150, i5(Jacopo Sadoleto) ; 
152, « (Antonio Pucci). In fact, it seems to be the commoner 
form of abbreviation. 


I, n]. The specimen illustrated, from Mr. Rosen- 
heim's collection, is certainly altogether charac- 
teristic of Cellini's work. The figure of Prudence, 
holding a mirror in her left hand, a pair of 
compasses in her right, with a dragon at her feet, 
is a skilful and charming design, with just that 
touch of prettiness that has made Cellini take a 
place in popular estimation far above his merit as 
a creative artist. The craftsmanship displayed in 
the modelling and chasing of both portrait and 
reverse design is. brilliant. The doubts which 
have been expressed by critics such as Plon about 
the attribution of this work to Cellini seem un- 
necessary, so far as they are inspired by any 
supposed inferiority of the piece to his accredited 
work. It may be noted that the specimen illus- 
trated by Plon is very poor, which may account 
for the unfavourable opinion which he expresses. 
Jean de Lorraine, born in 1498, became a Cardinal 
in 1518. Cellini may well have known him in 
Rome ; but the medal shows him at a mature age, 
so that it may have been made in France in 
1537 or between 1540 and 1545. 

One thing, however, is clear, apart from the 
attribution to Cellini ; and that is that, whoever 
made this medal of the Cardinal, made also two 
other medals, neither of which, I believe, has 
hitherto been associated with it. The figure of 
Prudence on the reverse of the medal of Scara- 
muccia Trivulzio (here illustrated, by Mr. Whit- 
combe Greene's permission, from his specimen), 
[Plate I, c]," is line for line the same as on the 
medal of the Cardinal de Lorraine. And it was 
evidently designed to accompany the obverse, not 
merely attached to it by a subsequent hand. It will 
be noticed that the stops on this reverse are of the 
same shape as on the medal of Ercole d'Este. 

Fabriczy attributed this medal, as well as another," 
apparently a reduction from the first, if not by the 
same hand, to Caradosso. Dr. Bode's hesitation 
in accepting the attribution'* seems wholly justified., 
The ' modelling and extraordinarily fine chasing, 
which Fabriczy regards as favouring his attribution' 
indicate Cellini just as much as Caradosso. The 
resemblance to Caradosso lies chiefly on the 
surface, especially in the flat modelling of the 
portrait-bust. The date of the medal — between 
1517 and 1522 — is, it must be admitted, early for 
Cellini. But we know from his autobiography 
that he was experimenting in work of this kind in 
his early days at Rome, when he was about twenty- 
three years old ; he made,'" for instance, a large 

"The specimen illustrated by Fabriczy (PI. XXXIV, 4) is 
curious. On the obverse the inscription (which, by the way, 
also has the abbreviation CAR.) reads wrongly COMIH for 
COMEN. The reverse, on the other hand, is evidently from 
an unfinished model, since, like the Weimar Ercole d'Este, it 
has concentric lines, but no inscription. 

"A specimen is illustrated in the Simon Catalogue, No. 206. 

^'■" Zeitschr. fiir bild. Kunst,' XV, p. 42. 

'6 P. 49 in Bacci's edition ; Bk. I, Chap. XXV, in Symonds's 



I jmi% 



Notes on Italian Medals 

golden medal for Gabbriello Ceserino to wear in 
his hat, with a design of Leda and the Swan. 
(English readers must not be misled, by Symonds's 
careless use of the word 'engraved,' to suppose 
that this medal was a flat engraved badge; 
the Italian word is ' isculpito.') Soon after men- 
tioning this badge, Cellini speaks of the medallic 
work^' of Caradosso and other artists, saying that 
he proceeded to perfect himself in this art. The 
way in which he mentions Caradosso indicates an 
artistic debt to the Milanese medallist, which is, as 
we have seen, evident to a certain extent in the 
portrait of Scaramuccia Tiivulzio. 

The medals of the Cardinal de Lorraine and of 
Scaramuccia Trivulzio carry with them yet another, 
representing Pietro Piantanida [Plate II, B].'" 
The figure of Faith on this piece, holding a 
chalice and pointing upwards, is, it will surely be 
admitted, own sister to the figures of Prudence on 
the medals of the Cardinal and Trivulzio. That 
being so, it is hardly necessary to draw attention to 
the triskeles stops in the legend DVM SPIRITVS 
HOS REGET ARTVS, or to the little leaf-like 
flourish in the exergue, which is found also at the 
end of the legend on the medal of the Cardinal. 

It would be interesting to know whether the 
other reverse*' which occurs in association with 
the portrait of Piantanida isalso by the same hand. 
But no specimen is known to me, and Armand's 
statement that one is in the Vienna Hofmuseura 
seems to be incorrect.-" 

Nothing appears to be known of Piantanida, 
but it is presumed that he belonged to the Milanese 
■ family of that name. 

Thus we have a group of medals, representing 
three persons, all indissolubly connected with each 
other by the general style of their reverses, as well 
as by the forms of their stops and ornaments. 
One of these has already been attributed to Cellini. 
two of them have the same stops as are found on 
The large portrait of Ercole II, also independently 
attributed to Cellini, and corresponding, so far as 
we can judge, with the medal of which he himself 
gives us the description. In this deceitful world, 
no attribution is certain, even when a work is 
signed; but the case for the attribution to Cellini 
of all this group of medals seems to be very 

Some stress has been laid on the three-legged or 
triskeles stop which is found on no less than three 
of these pieces. It is an unusual form, very rare 
in the fifteenth century, not common in the 
sixteenth until after the middle of the century, 
when it is used, for instance, by Gianfederigo 
Bonzagna and Giannantonio Rossi. In fact, the 
only other examples before 1550 which I can 

" ' Medaglie cesellate fatte di piastra ' and ' medagUe in- 
tagliate in acciaio.' 
"From the British Museum specimen. 
'»AxmandlII,223, E. 
^ Coaimunication from Ritter A von, Loehr. 

quote are the medals by the ' Medallist of the 
Captive Love' of Jacopa Corregia and Maddalena 
Rossi and Spinelli's medal of Andrea Gritti with 
the church of San Francesco della Vigna, dated 
1534. Doubtless a few other instances would be 
revealed by search. 

This peculiar stop and a leaf-like ornament not 
unlike that which we have noticed on the medals 
of the Cardinal de Lorraine and of Piantanida 
occur, curiously enough, in conjunction on the fine 
medal of the otherwise unknown Venetian, Antonio 
Bossi.-' The British Museum specimen is illus- 
trated on Plate II, C, not in order to support 
an unwarrantable attribution to Cellini, but rather 
to show how a stronger hand treats subjects akin 
to his. The noble figure of Fame on the reverse 
of this medal is more largely conceived, more 
finely composed and modelled, than anything 
from Cellini's hand ; its forms generally are cast 
in the mould of great sculpture. The handling of 
the drapery on the medals of the Cardinal de Lor- 
raine, Trivulzio and Piantanida is seen to be 
niggling and petty when compared with this. 
We shall not be far wrong, I think, in seeing in 
this piece the influence of the great Florentine who 
worked at Venice, and whose works have some- 
times been claimed for Cellini — I mean Jacopo 


Documents published by Count Nicolo Papa- 
dopoli^ have thrown a certain amount of light on 
the obscure history of the Venetian mint in the 
fifteenth century. In these, among other refer- 
ences of interest, are to be found records of the 
activity of a certain Antonello, engraver to the 
mint, which I enumerate in a footnote.** From 
these documents it appears that Antonello di 
Pietro, variously described as ' orefice ' or, from 

^'Armand II, 225, 6; Fabriczy. PI. XVII, 4. The medal 
belongs to the third quarter of the sixteenth century. 

^ ' Alcune notizie sugli intagliatori della Zecca di Venezia ' in 
' Riv. ital. di numism.,' I (18S8), pp. 351-358. Cp. his ' Monete 
di Venezia,' in which information, analysed in the next note, is 
given : I, pp. 277, 282 ; II, pp. 5. 44, 45. 

^ 1454, 26th July. Luca Sesto znd Antonello della Moneta are 
mentioned as in receipt of a salary as engravers of dies. 
(Probably the second-named artist had come into office on the 
death of Gerolamp Sesto in 1447; but this is mere conjecture.) 

1461, 13th March. The engraver Antonello receives an 
order for dies. 

1462, 14th May. The Signoria approves the die for the 
grosso, fato per man de Maistro Anloncllt, 

1474, 24th July. Antonello di Pietro, called also Antonello 
della Moneta, and his two sons are in the employ of the mint, 
the salary of the two sons being deducted from that of Luca 
Sesto, who is no longer capable of work. 

1483, i6th October. Luca Sesto, being old and unable to 
come to his work, asks for his son Bernardo to be made master 
of the dies. This is granted. 

1484, 24th February [given as 1483, 27th February, in ' Riv. 
ital.,' I, p. 353 ; the difference in the years is presumably due 
to the calendar]. Alexander de Leopardis, goldsmith, is 
admitted as third master, without salary, with Luca Sesto and 
Antonello orefice. Silvtstro and PasquAe sons of Antonello a 
stampis, complain that they have served long in the hope of 
succeeding their father, and offer to submit proofs of their 


Notes on Italian Medals 

his post, as 'della Moneta,' was active at the 
Venetian Mint from 1454 (perhaps from 1447) to 
1484. From the last entry it appears that his 
family name was Grifo (or, as it is written in the 
note of Silvestro's death in 1503, Griffo). 

Now there are two interesting medals repre- 
senting doges who were ruling during this period, 
one signed AN, the other ANT. The initials AN, 
writes Fabriczy," 'are insufficient to dispel the 
obscurity of the origin of the former; and ' whether 
the medal of the Doge Cristoforo Moro, signed 
ANT, belongs to the same artist is doubtful on 
account of the difference in style.' However, let 
us describe them : — 

(i) Francesco Foscari, Doge 1423-1457. 

to right in ducal robe and cap. Rev. VENETIA 
MAGNA, and in exergue AN. Venetia, wearing 
cuirass over tunic, seated to front on a throne 
formed by two lions; she holds in her right a 
sword erect, and in her left a kite-shaped shield 
charged with a lion rampant ; at her feet are two 

Bibliotheque Nationale. Bronze, 46 mm. PI. II, D. Cp. 
Armand I, p. 25. Heiss, ' Venise,' PI. I, Nos. i (48 mm.) 
and 2 (41 mm.). The second medal is described by Heiss as 
consisting only of a reverse, which is found attached to the 
portrait ol Cristoforo Moro by the artist ' Ant.' He and Armand 
both agree in supposing that this combination is a hybrid. 

We may note that the type is adapted from, or 
goes back to a common original with, an inte- 
resting relief on the fa9ade of the Palazzo Ducale 
towards the Piazzetta^ representing ' Venecia ' with 
the same attributes, with the sea flowing beneath 
her feet, and the proud legend on a scroll: FORTIS 
PONO. The two half-figures then, on the medals 
as on the relief, represent the ' furies ' of discord 
and sedition, not, as they have hitherto been 
described, captives. 

(2) Cristoforo Moro, Doge 1462-1471. 

on stalk). Bust to left, in ducal robe and cap; on 
the truncation, • ANT • 

Rev. Within an oak wreath, • RELIGIONIS • 
ET • IVSTICIAE . CVLTOR • in four lines, and 
two leaves on a stalk. 

Border of dots on both sides. Stops : inverted triangles. 

British Museum. Bronze, 42 mm. PI. II, r, Keary, 
'Guide.' No. 74. Cp. Armand 1, 46, i. Heiss, ' Venise, PI. I, 
No. 6, p. 105. 

1484, 4th March. A trial is ordered. 

1484, 30th March, The two sons of Antonello are retained 
to work with their father, one of them to succeed him on his 

1484, 28th September. Vettor di Antonio da San Zacharia 
(I'.e , Vettor Gambello or Camelio) is made master of the dies. 

1484. 29th September. The work on the dies of the ducat 
divided between Luca Sesto (uno de i piu antiqui maistri de le 
stampe de la zecha nostra) and Alessandrcdei Leopardi for the 
obverse, and Pasquale and Silvestro di Antonello iov the reverse. 

1490, 9th December. Silvesiro Grifo, master of the dies, 
invents a new alloy. 

** ' Italian Medals,' p. 73. 

i» Venluri, 'Storia dell' Arte ital.,' VI, pp. 27, 28. 

A glance at the two medals, as illustrated in PLATE 
II, D and F, will show the great difference in 
style between them, which seems amply to justify 
the refusal of Armand and Heiss to admit that they 
can be from the same hand."" It is, however, 
extremely natural to suppose that medals of the 
doges should, in some cases at least, be made by 
engravers at the Venetian mint at this period as 
they were later, for instance, by Camelio. And 
when we have an engraver Antonello employed at 
the mint precisely at the period at which these 
medals signed AN and ANT were produced, the 
supposition in question becomes more natural than 
ever, even although it be recognized that names 
beginning in Ant . . . are very common. We are 
however not much advanced so long as we do not 
know which of the two medals to attribute to our 
engraver. The later piece, on the whole, seems on 
stylistic grounds to have much the stronger claim. 
It lacks the largeness of style, the boldness of 
modelling, which characterize the medal of Fos- 
cari ; the ininute decoration of the cap and robe and 
the flat and uninspired reverse suggest that it may 
well have been the work of a man accustomed to 
use the graver. The medal of Foscari, on the other 
hand, has considerable sculptural quality. It is 
worth notice — though I do not advance it as a 
reason for attribution — that Vettor Gambello, who 
was appointed engraver in 1484, was the son of one 
Antonio, niarmorarius cognotiiento de San Zacharia, 
at that time no longer living. The artist who made 
the Foscari medal, adapting for his reverse type 
the design of a piece of sculpture on the fagade of 
the ducal palace, may well have been this sculptor. 


The little medal illustrated in Plate II, E, is, I 
believe, extremely rare. 

Obv. • 10- lATRI-MAR- VIGLE- MARE- 
SCAL • FRAN • Equestrian statue of Gian Gia- 
como Trivulzio to right, holding baton in right ; 
in the exergue, device of a cross in flaming circle 
(the ruota del Sole) between the letters S V. 

and in exeigue S V. Female figure seated to 
right on a stool, nude to waist, holding in right a 
wand behind her head, in left a cord which is 
attached to a lion standing on a garlanded basis. 

Border of dots on both sides. 

Rosenheim Collection. Bronze, 31.5 mm. PI. II, E. 

This is clearly Milanese work of the early part 
of the sixteenth century. It reminds us in some 
degree of a small group of medals of Ludovico il 
Moro, which have been attributed to Caradosso," 

^ Of course, the fact that a copy of the reverse of the Foscari 
medal is found attached to the Moro portrait does not prove 
any original connexion between them. 

"" Friedlander, ' Ital. Schaumunzen,' p. i88. 


Notes on Italian Medals 

without very great probability.-' They celebrate 
the defeats of the French and their expulsion 
from Italy. 

The medal has not found its way into Armand's 
collection, although it had already been illustrated 
(by a very indifferent engraving, it is true) in 
Rosmini's Life of the Marshal."" Rosmini describes 
the medal accurately except that he takes the 
woman for a man. He makes the interesting 
suggestion that the reverse may refer to the rout 
of the Venetians by the French (with whom 
Trivulzio was present) at Agnadello on 14th 
Mav, 1509, the lion representing Venice. So, we 
may note, the horse represents Naples on one of 
the medals of Ludovico il Moro mentioned above. 
Rosmini says the piece reminds him in style and 
colour of metal of another, which he describes 
and illustrates. This medal also has escaped 
Armand's net. I have been, unable to meet with 
a specimen, but describe it after Rosmini. 

IE (trefoil) and, in exergue, MCCCCCVIII. 
The marshal on a prancing horse to right ; he 
wears a cuirass, and holds baton erect in his 
right ; behind him, a young man on horseback 
riding on his left. 

No reverse, Bronze. Diameter, 44 mm. (to judge from 
illustration). Rosmini, II, PI. Ill, 43. 

The date 1508 on this medal confirms Rosmini's 

28 H. de la Tour, ' Rev. Num.,' 1896, pp. 92 ff. 
29 C. de Rosmini, 'Dell' Istoria . . . di Gian-Jacopo Trivulzio ' 
(Milan, 1815), II, PI. Ill, No. 44 and p. 378. 

conjectural date for the one before us. The 
young man is, perhaps, the marshal's son, Gian 

Rosmini is unable to explain the letters S V ; 
his suggestion that they are the signature of an 
artist is not likely. It is tempting to see in them 
some allusion to Vigevano, but what the S may 
mean I do not know. The place can hardly have 
boasted a ' Senate.' Although there was never a 
mint at Vigevano, there prevailed, as early as 1596, 
a tradition that the marshal had coins (nutnmi) of 
bronze and silver struck there.'" Possibly these 
medals are the mimnii in question. 

The most interesting point about the medal, 
however, is none of these ; but the fact that we 
have on it an equestrian portrait of Trivulzio. In 
spite of its small scale, the figure is clearly seen to 
be a portrait. The general composition is doubt- 
less more or less conventional, but it is impossible 
to ignore it in connexion with the designs which 
Leonardo da Vinci made for the equestrian 
monument of the marshal. It may be left to 
students of Leonardo to say whether it is 
actually inspired by Leonardo's designs — in which 
case it might help us to sort out the drawings for 
the Trivulzio monument from the others which 
resemble them — or, as I am inclined to think more 
probable, is merely the medallist's notion, sug- 
gested by his knowledge that the monument had 
been designed. 

'"Rosmini, II, p. 346. 


NGLISH painting has always 
been enfeebled by a desire to 
represent what is not. Its evil 
genius is that Satan, the god of 
unreality, whom Blake addressed 
and defined in a wonderful 
verse — 

Though thou art worshipped by the names divine 

Of Jesus and Jehovah, thou art slill 
The Son of Morn in weary night's decline. 

The lost traveller's dream under the hill. 

English painters are always painting 'the lost 
traveller's dream under the hill,' a dream of some 
'shady city of palm trees,' or of some past age of 
the world in which they would rather live than in 
their own ; and in trying to see that dream they 
get a distaste for the visible world about them. 
Painting is not the art of imitating reality, but 
rather the art of expressing a passion for reality, 
and without this passion no man can be a great 
painter. Correggio and Titian had it no less than 
Rembrandt. They painted what their eyes had 

dwelt upon from childhood and what was endeared 
to them by a thousand associations. English 
painters, when they try to be Italian or French, do 
not paint what their eyes have dwelt upon from 
childhood, and in their pictures there is none of 
that richness and intensity that only come from 
association. They have made a false distinction 
between idealism and realism, from not understand- 
ing that the distinction exists only for the critic, 
not for the artist. The artist must be both realist 
and idealist, always painting an idea that he gets 
from reality and its emotional associations, and 
not from the pictures of other artists. In fact, his 
raw material must be life, not art From art he 
can only learn method, and it is often dangerous 
for him to learn method that is associated with 
a raw material different from his own. 

The besetting weaknesses of English art are 
illustrated more signally, perhaps, in the career of 
Turner than of any other English painter, just 
because he was the greatest of our painters and at 
last overcame them. And it is well to draw atten- 
tion to these weaknesses because we cannot 


The Weakness and Strength of Turner 

understand his development without understanding 
them, and because they are often considered his 
greatest virtues. Foreigners are apt to regard the 
reputation of Turner as an English superstition 
because it is associated with dreams of Italy, with 
attempts to paint wiiat the romantic poets have 
sung, that curious northern nostalgia for the South, 
for a home that has never been their iiome. 
Turner went to Italy and made wonderful sketches 
there, which are not dreams but records of what he 
saw. When he returned he tried to continue 
these in elaborate pictures, such as Caligula's Palace, 
or Childe Harold's Pilgrimage, which are mere 
dreams that have lost even their dreamlike con- 
sistency in the effort to represent them with an 
irrelevant precision. He also, in pictures like 
Crossing live Brook, tried to make an English view 
look Italian, and in doing so robbed it of its own 
peculiar character. In fact, he painted it, not for 
its own sake, but because he saw in it some casual 
resemblance to views of a wholly different charac- 
ter as they had been represented in the pictures of 
older masters. The result was a wonderful ioiir 
deforce, the artifice of which betrays itself both in 
cold colour and mechanical composition. 

But Turner's career is interesting because he did 
not succumb to these weaknesses, but overcame 
them more than any other eclectic English painter, 
more even than Reynolds. We can see now that 
whole career illustrated with magnificent complete- 
ness at the Tate Gallery ; and we can note with 
what devious and uncertain steps he approached 
the perfect union of idealism and realism, without 
which there can be no masterpiece. In crafts- 
manship Turner is the last of the old masters. 
He inherited their traditions as no later painter 
has inherited them. His execution in early 
pictures, such as the Tenth Plague of Egypt, 
exhibited in 1802, is free from all modern 
flurry and vagueness, except, perhaps, in the 
figures. Yet this picture, with others like it, 
is too abstract in conception to be a master- 
piece. In it Turner, with a power already great 
of representing what he saw, was painting what 
he had never seen except in other pictures. He 
was trying, as so many English painters have 
done, to use imagination as a substitute for 
experience. His mind was filled with an abstract 
design, and to serve as a pretext for it he chose a 
subject removed as far as possible from any reality 
that he knew, a subject which had no control 
over his design. He has made a prodigious effort 
to provide scenery suited to some great event, but 
the scenery, as in many romantic poems, over- 
powers the event. Thus it is a picture of 
momentous scenery, with buildings taken from 
Canaletto that have lost their identity in the 
taking, and with a tempestuous sky that recalls 
the background of a late Titian. Everything 
seems to have a significance that belongs to some 


other picture, and the whole is not significant' 
because it has been arbitrarily conceived and is 
not the result of an emotional emphasis upon 
things seen. Yet even while Turner was thus 
painting what he had never seen he was able to 
produce a masterpiece which expressed the 
northerner's passion for a southern dreamland as 
powerfully as it is expressed in ' Kennst du das 
Land.' In the Garden of the Hespcrides the subject 
mastered the design, and his purpose became clear 
to himself. Then he knew that he was painting 
a paradise he could never enter ; and the dragon 
guarding the pass is a symbol of its impossibility. 
This picture is one of the events of art, the 
clear expression of something that had never 
before been expressed in painting, and can never 
be expressed again with the same sense of adven- 
ture. The Apollo Killing the Python is a success 
as great but not so surprising, for there Turner 
makes a northern myth out of the Greek story. 
The whole landscape, as in the earlier Jason 
Finding the Golden Fleece, is a northern landscape, 
and the Python seems to be a creature of it. So 
wonderfully is Turner possessed by his conception 
of the myth that he has managed to forget the 
Apollo Belvedere. This Apollo means business, 
and he is more like a Christian saint exalted by 
suffering, than a Graeco-Roman god, whose whole 
energy is spent in trying to look like a god. In 
fact, the picture, in the quality of its imagination, 
recalls Rembrandt rather than any Italian, and it 
belongs to the north as much as a Saga or a great 
Gothic cathedral. 

But the greatest achievements of Turner are not 
to be found in his representations of any set 
subjects, not even in his Odysseus deriding the 
Cyclops, nor in the Fighting Temiraire. He was 
born to be a landscape painter, but he did not 
become one easily because all through his life he 
was possessed by a desire to associate landscape 
with events significant to the human mind. Many 
modern artists have become landscape painters 
too easily, and have been content with a vague 
poetry of nature or a prosaic record of its facts. 
Turner had too great a power of representation to 
be content with the first, and too strong a love of 
abstract design to be content with the second. 
And at the same time his mind was filled with 
ideas half literary and often confused and absurd, 
which he laboured to express in his pictures. If 
he had been an Italian of the sixteenth century, 
he would have found traditional subjects through 
which he could have expressed all that he wanted 
to express. We can see them all now in the Scuola 
di San Rocco. But in his day they belonged to a 
bygone tradition. He could not produce his 
greatest masterpieces until his imagination was 
wholly possessed by the mere spectacle of things, 
until the sun and the earth and the sea meant as 
much to him, apart from any story attached^to 

The Weakness and Strength of Turner 

them, as the cloud meant to Shelley when he 
wrote its lyrical autobiography. In fact Turner's 
career was so devious and experimental, it seems 
so full of caprice and haste, because half-uncon- 
sciously he was always trying to make landscapes 
as full of significance and as lucid and weighty in 
design as the great subject-pictures of the world. 
He could not give the whole force of his mind 
even to works like the Frosty Uorning. That 
picture, for all its delicate truth, lacks intensity 
and coherence. It is a little meagre, a little 
wanting in emphasis. It seems to be the 
result of deliberate observation, and not of 
impassioned contemplation, as if the painter had 
turned by an effort of will to a reality that he 
found cold and tame after his dreams. But there 
are pictures of his in which his dreams seem to 
come true, in which the idea has no need to play 
tricks with the reality, because the reality has 
mastered his mind and driven all confused fancies 
out of it. And in those works one can see that 
his Italianizing had not been mere waste. The 
greatest landscapes of Turner are greater, perhaps, 
than any other modern landscapes, because they 
have a precision and grandeur of design that are 
found elsewhere only in subject pictures. Con- 
stable, the greatest of sketchers, tried to impart 
this grandeur of design to his larger works, and 
often in the process made them look over-com- 
posed and laboured. He never absorbed the 
great principles of composition so that he could 
see them in reality and apply them by a process 
of mere elimination. But Turner, after his long 
labours both in rapid sketching from nature and 
in devising abstract designs, could, in heaven-sent 
moments, do this. The Tenth Plague of Egypt, 
the Garden of the Hespcrides, the Destiuction of 
Sodom, the Frosty Morning, and even Richmond 
Hill on the Prince Regent's Birthday, were all use- 
ful to him as experience when he came to paint a 
picture like the Pdworth Park. That work has 
all the balanced intensity of a great subject-picture, 
and yet it is as vivid as a sketch by Constable. It 
is like the landscapes of ' Paradise Lost,' in which 
every detail seems to bear an epic significance 
and largeness, yet the whole raises an image more 
clear than any precise prose description could 
raise. Turner, like Milton, attained to this synthetic 
power by combining a passion for real beauty 
with a passion for the classics of his art. They 
taught him to be exacting, almost too exacting, in 
his idea of landscape. They led him into a hundred 
impossible experiments ; and perhaps it was only 
when the glory of nature made him unconscious 
of their influence that he profited most by it. 
The Petivorih Park recalls no old masters, yet 
the great subject - pictures of the world are 
behind it ; it is nature seen by an eye conversant 
with the more expressive forms of men and of 

men's handiwork, and in it nature seems to be- 
come as expressive as those forms. There is the 
strength and purpose of architecture in the massed 
trees ; the clouds about the setting sun seem as 
full of meaning as choirs of angels ; and the deer 
grazing on the shadowy turf belong to the en- 
chanted hour like the figures in Giorgione's 
Pastoral. The sun and the sea were the two great 
natural objects that at last entirely satisfied Turner's 
imagination, so that in painting them he could 
express himself as completely as Fra Angelico 
expressed himself when he painted the Crucifixion. 
In works like the Petivorih Park, the Norhani 
Castle, and the Evening Star, he became an entirely 
modern painter, dispensing altogether with symbols, 
expressing himself purely through representation ; 
and no other modern painter has made pure 
representation so completely expressive. The 
Norham Castle, compared with the most brilliant 
sun-piece by Monet, is like lyrical poetry com- 
pared with prose, that is to say it leaves a stronger 
image upon the mind because it is a more highly 
organized means of expression. As our finest 
lyrics of nature, such as Shelley's 'Cloud,' are based 
upon earlier lyrics of human passion and owe 
their rhythm and their very turn of speech to 
these ; so the Norham Castle, vivid and unforced 
as it is, owes its design and even its execution to 
a tradition of subject-painting. There is the same 
kind of emphasis in its brushworkas in the brush- 
work of Titian and Rubens. But this emphasis, 
which is of the same nature as the emphasis of 
poetry, is gone from the painting of Monet, and 
indeed from most modern landscape painting. 
The effort to represent facts that have no great 
emotional significance to the painter has de- 
stroyed it, just as prosaic fulness of narrative drives 
poetic emphasis out of language. This is not to 
say that Monet has not poetic power. He has ; 
but like Tolstoy he uses a prose medium. Turner 
used a poetic medium and often misused it. 
But his poetic medium, with all its traditions, 
enabled him to take full advantage of his inspira- 
tions when they came, whereas the inspirations of 
Monet are hampered by a prosaic medium. Thus 
he can never rise to the heights of Turner, as no 
prose writer can ever rise to the heights of a great 
poet. Turner, alone among modern painters, has 
combined the modern curiosity about phenomena 
and the modern passion for a nature independent 
of men with the ancient craft of picture-making. 
He alone has achieved the transition from ancient 
to modern art without any rupture of tradition. 
Yet this achievement of his has been so little 
understood that some of his greatest works have 
only lately been rescued from a cellar, and his 
popular reputation is still largely based upon 
works that are a confused medley of old romance 
and new observation. 



F we only knew Leonardo from 
tlie nine or ten genuine pictures 
which can reasonably beascribed 
to the master's own hand, we 
should have but an incomplete 
knowledge of his powers of 
^^^^21f invention and composition. The 
^ ^^"^^ tremendous influence he had on 

his pupils, has impressed the Leonardesque stamp 
on scores of pictures by Beltrafifio, Bernardino 
de'Conti, Salaino, Melzi, Oggionno, Cesare da 
Sesto, Luini and Ambrogio da Predis. To the 
hst must be added, as Morelli acutely observed, 
a scarcely known North Italian painter, Francesco 
Napolitano, of whom only three pictures have, up 
to now, been quoted. 

The painter's name was first discovered by 
Morelli' on a small picture belonging to Sig. 
Bononii-Cereda, at Milan. The great Italian critic 
immediately recognized the same hand in another 
picture, at the Brera. For twenty years no other 
paintings by the same hand have been discovered, 
except a small panel at New York, published by 
Si 4. Cagnola, but, on the strength of misleading 
evidence, Francesco Napolitano has been credited 
by Morelli with a number of Spanish pictures 
with which he had certainly nothing to do. 
An error contained in one of Morelli's essays is 
likely to be repeated by many authors. An old 
Spanish book, misunderstood by a local author 
and by Justi himself, ascribed the wings of the 
celebrated Valencia altarpiece to a certain Fran- 
cesco Pagano of Naples, assisted by one Pietro of 
Arezzo (or Reggio), who were said to have worked 
at it in 1472. The ablest specialists, from Morelli 
to Mr. Cook, have felt no hesitation in identifying 
Francesco Pagano with our Francesco Napolitano 
and have ascribed to him the strongly Leonardesque 
paintings of the Valencia altar and half a dozen 
other pictures at Murcia and elsewhere in Spain. 
A few years ago Don Roque and later still. 
Monsieur Bertaux^ have conclusively proved by 
documentary evidence that the altarpiece was the 
exclusive work of two Spaniards, Ferrando de 
Llanez and Ferrando de Almedina, who completed 
it in 1507, and that the only pictures to beascribed 
to Francesco and Pietro were a series of fresco- 
paintings destroyed by a fire in 1682. These being 
lost, we know nothing of their style, and it is but 
an idle speculation to attempt an identification 
of a Francesco Pagano whom we find at Valencia 
in 1472, with a Francesco Napolitano known only 
from a couple of North Italian pictures of the early 
sixteenth century. 

Let us now examine the three known pictures 
of Francesco Napolitano. 

' ' Kunstkritische Studien uber italienischen Malerei,' Vol. I 
(1890), p, 203, note. 
^Bertaux "Gazette des Beaux-arts,' 1907, Vol. II. 

The Bonomi-Cereda picture was bought, in the 
last years of the nineteenth century, by the Zurich 
Museum. A few years ago, the Museum authorities, 
wishing the pictiu-e to be cleaned, sent it to Milan 
and entrusted it to the able hand of Professor 
Cavenaghi. Once the dirt was removed, the panel 
appeared again in its original freshness. The 
brilliant colouring emerged from under three 
centuries of grime, and the picture, in spite of its 
only too evident faults, turned out to be a highly 
interesting document on the history of the late 
Leonardesque school. On a pedestal of many- 
coloured marble the Virgin is painted sitting, 
de face, with the Child standing undraped on 
her right knee — on the right. Saint Sebastian 
praying, with clasped hands, but standing — on 
the left. Saint John the Baptist, depicted as 
an adult and bowing before Jesus, his arms 
crossed before his breast. Through a window a 
small piece of landscape can just be seen behind 
Saint John's back. On the front of the pedestal is 
written, in large letters, FRANCICZO NAPOLI- 
TANO. This signature appeared to be a modern 
addition. Professor Cavenaghi therefore carefully 
removed it and discovered beneath it the same 
name faintly dotted in black, but of unquestionable 
antiquity. He further observed on a horse, in 
the centre of the same pedestal, the two initials 
' F. N.' 

The Brera picture was formerly in the Manfrini 
palace at Venice ; when that celebrated collection 
was dispersed some fifty or sixty years ago' this 
particular painting was purchased by the Emperor 
of Austria, who presented it to the Accademia di 
Venezia, from which it was obtained in 1883, by 
the Brera, in exchange for a Crivelli and an 
Andrea di Murano. It is a small panel (16 by 
12 ins.), a Madonna with the Child in three-quarter 
figure. The Child, undraped, is sitting on her 
left knee, her face is slightly turned towards the 
left and her right hand is extended towards the 
Infant's lips. Through a window on the right 
we can see a small piece of landscape, with a 
lake, two boats, and a tower on the water's 
edge. The composition is clever and the de- 
sign pleasing, but the details of it are very weak. 
The shadows are too dark and lack totally the 
beautiful transparence of other Leonardesque 
pictures. The Virgin's robe is of a peculiar 
claret-colour, which also occurs in the Zurich 

The third Francesco Napolitano was discovered 
by Mr Berenson, who evidently does not think 
much of our Master, since he has not deemed him 
worthy of a place m his 'North-Italian Painters of 
the Renaissance.' It belongs to the New York 

"Is it known to many specialists that a number of the finest 
pictures were bought by Mayer de Rothschild, and are now at 
Mentmore .' 







New Pictures by Francesco Napolitano 

Historical Society, and has been published by Sig. 
Guido Cagnola,* from a photograph taken for 
Mr. Berenson. It is a very poor half-figure 
Madonna, with the Child sitting on her right knee. 
One of the most striking differences between this 
and the iVIilan and Zurich pictures lies in the 
light vest worn by the Child. 

The object of this article is to add two more to 
the short list of extant paintings by Francesco 
Napolitano. It is highly probable that a careful 
study of English, Italian and other continental 
collection would reveal more works of this despised 
painter. It is much to be desired that researches 
should be made in that direction, not so much 
because of the artist's special merit, which must 
not be exaggerated, as for the particular interest 
derived from his Leonardesque inspiration. 

The first of the two new pictures was formerly 
in the collection of Baron Blanc in the Chateau de 
Chancy, near Chambery ; the present owner, M. 
Salomon Reinach, who has kindly drawn our 
attention to this interesting painting [Plate, b], 
obtained it in June, 1907, for a small sum, at the 
Sedelmeyer sale (Catalogue, Vol. Ill, No. 127). 
It is painted in oils on a rectangular panel 
(^\\\ by8| in.). The subject is not unlike the one 
depicted in the New York picture — a half-figure 
Madonna looking towards the left and holding in 
her arms the Child whom she has just been 
suckling. The Infant is leaning backwards and 
looking towards the spectator ; His left hand still 
presses His mother's naked breast. 

The ascription to Francesco Napolitano, though 
unsupported by any documentary evidence, does 
not seem open to the slightest doubt. Every 
characteristic feature of the Zurich, Milan and New 
Yorkpictures recurs on Monsieur Reinach's panel : 
the heavy eye-lids, with the faintest possible hints 
of eye-brows and eye-lashes; the long golden hair 
evenly parted and dropping in thin straggling 
locks; the dull greenish robe; the peculiar claret- 
coloured tunic ; the slender, tapering, shapeless 
fingers; and, above all, the curious clumsy Child, 
with abnormally fat cheeks, wistful eyes, thick legs 
and strange flattened toes. 

The fifth Francesco Napolitano was recently 
discovered in a private collection at Geneva by 
Monsieur Alfred Cartier, Directeur General des 
Musees, who has kindly provided the accompany- 
ing illustration [Plate.c] and an accurate sketch of 
the signature, for the picture is signed, so that the 
only two signed pictures by our artist are both in 
Switzerland.^ The signature consists of the ini tials 
FR, a turnip (in Italian napo) and the letters LIA 
—i.e., FR(anciscus) NAPOLI(t)A(nus). The 
explanation of this curious pun was discovered 

*'Rassegna d'arte,' 1905, p. 83. 

° While this article was in the press the Geneva picture was 
purchased for the Zurich Museum, which now owns both the 
signed Francesco Napolitanos. 

by Monsieur Reinach, who has kindly placed his 
notes at my disposal. 

The Geneva picture is also a half-figure 
Madonna, very similar to M, Reinach's panel, 
but of superior design and execution. The 
Virgin's face is very nearly the same, and the 
position of the Infant is in every point identical, 
but the mother is not suckling her Child, which 
appears to be nearly bald, so faintly is the hair 
delineated on its forehead. The landscape in the 
background recalls the Zurich and Milan pictures, 
and is evidently derived from Leonardesque 
sources. The inscription quoted above runs along 
the lower edge of the panel. 

The five pictures here described fully justify 
Morelli's opinion of Francesco Napolitano. He 
placed him between the immediate pupils of 
Leonardo, such as Salaino and Meizi, and the free 
imitators of the great master, who combined 
Leonardo's cartoons with earlier Milanese sources, 
such as Foppa's favourite motives. It is not easy 
to judge an artist by five pictures only, but it is 
hardly to be overlooked that each of the five 
shows an effort to evolve from the Leonardesque 
material a new design such as he and his friends 
could still admire, which we are now compelled 
to decipher as in a palimpsest under their inter- 

It is a strange coincidence which has enabled us 
to publish here for the first time two closely similar 
paintings from the hand of one of Leonardo's 
pupils and imitators. Stranger still is the coincidence 
which enables us to point out the possible origin 
of the types adopted by Francesco Napolitano for 
the Virgin's head. Only a slight comparison of the 
two versions of the Vierge aux Rochers is necessary 
to show that the face of the Virgin is not the same 
in the Louvre masterpiece as in the beautiful 
picture belonging to the National Gallery ; but 
it is a curious freak that the Reinach and 
Geneva Madonnas described in this note show 
one the Paris, and the other the London type. 
What better proof could be given that Francesco 
Napolitano had free access to Leonardo's drawings 
and pictures ; perhaps he even saw the London 
Virgin of the Rocks, so close is the analogy 
between it and the Genevan Madonna. 

Francesco Napolitano was an original and per- 
sonal colourist, but a very indifferent draughtsman. 
We cannot claim that the charm which still lingers 
around his rare and neglected paintings is due to 
his slight talent : we seek in him but the shadow 
of a great artist, whose shadow even is worthy 
of our attention.*^ 

'since M. de Ricci's article was submitted to us, yet another 
example of Francesco Napolitano has been found. By the 
courtesy of Mr. G. Brauer in whose possession it is, we are 
able to reproduce it [Plate a]. It shows his characteristic 
composition and design, though the face of the Madonna is still 
further removed from Leonardo's than in either of the examples 
given in the text. 




H E period from which Hsiang 
Yuan-p'ien took his examples 
of the noble bluc-and-wliite 
porcelain is that of the Golden 
Age, of the Emperor Hsiian 
Tfi. The reign of the Em- 
peror Yung lo (1403-1424) he 
passes over. Is this criticism ? 
We might accept it, though we are not provided 
with examples of the Yung-lo period blue-and- 
white porcelain whereby to decide the question. 
The cups in the British Museum, in the Dresden 
Johanneum, and in the Berlin Kunsfgewerbe 
Museum belong to the type which the Japanese 
have named seki-heki [Plate III, c]. On the 
outside is a landscape panel enlivened with figures 
(mostly rowers in boats), and| a long poetical in- 
scription ; around the inner side are floral friezes. 
On the bottom, inside, is the mark ' Yung lo nien 
chih ' in ordinary writing.' A characteristic of 
all the cups is the heavy unglazed base with the 
wide ring as foot. 

In spite of the examples of Hsiian yao which 
Hsiang illustrates, we are not on materially firmer 
ground when we come to consider the blue-and- 
white porcelain of this epoch, which is so generally 
lauded as the classical era of decoration in blue. 
For it must be admitted that Hsiang's illustrations 
do not sufficiently reproduce the celebrated grey- 
toned blue of the Su-ni-p'o (the Mohammedan 
blue), nor yet the soft lighting and vibration under 
the glaze which we can to some extent leconstruct 
from the Ch^ng T5 porcelain. 

Furthermore, Hsiang's taste, which was that of a 
litterateur with antiquarian leanings, appears one- 
sided. Otto Kiimmel" has called it academic — 
possibly not unreasonably. In Hsiang's selections 
there is evidence of an idolatrous reverence for 
bronzes as being instinct with divine power, because 
they have been hallowed by the breath of the 
ancestors, and this is specially noticeable in his 
choice of blue-and-white porcelains which he con- 
siders worthy of preservation for posterity. 

His poorly decorated Hsiian yao are actually 
only make-shifts for bronze or jade vessels, hardly 
ceramic types of their period. Only the tea-cup 
(Hsiang, PI. 48) with its dragon and pine decora- 
tion is somewhat more promising. Here ap- 
pears a pictorial treatment which hints that the 
draughtsmanship of the porcelain painter of this 
and the next century was considerably greater 
than is evinced in the common household-utensils 
from which we ordinarily derive our knowledge of 
the blue Ming porcelains. Even here Hsiang shovvg 

' Translated by H. C. Ferraby. 

''Brinkley's ('Japan and China,' Vol. ix, page 106) remarks 
•written in a more archaic form' must refer to the white egg- 
shell bowls imitated by Eiraku. 

^' lUustrierte Geschichte des Kunstgewerbes,' IX Abt. Das 
Kunstgewerbe in Ostasien, page 791. 


his academic bias ; the tea-cup he explains, was 
probably copied from a jade wine-cup, and the 
motive of tortuous dragon-like trees would be 
taken from a painting by the Sung master Kuo 
Hsi (Japanese Kwakki). 

Hsiang's description of the paste and glaze of 
his pieces is fragmentary, and the figures in the 
album which Dr. Bushell edited illustrate the 
descriptions in the text very incompletely. Neither 
the colour of the glaze ' lustrous like hard mutton- 
fat' (a jade technical term), nor its texture, 'with 
millet-like grains rising in faint relief,' are indica- 
ted in these shades. 

Unfortunately European and American collec- 
tions afford no material for criticism of the 
knowledge thus handed down to us on the subject 
of Hsiian T& porcelain. It seems, however, that 
early pieces, which I fei;l impelled to place before 
Ch^ngTd (1506-21), vary undoubtedly from those 
of the sixteenth century, by reason of the texture 
being less greenish and more ' fatty ' white on 
their surface. A pilgrim-bottle in the possession 
of Mrs. Halsey shown at the Burlington Fine Arts 
Club 1910 (Case L 23), with a Mohammedan in- 
scription of the year 1659-60 painted in dark 
mottled blue, in places almost black, and paeony 
scrolls, falls outside the better-known types of Ming 
by reason of its much clearer chalky-white glaze. 
This piece has all the charm of an object meant 
for domestic use ; the surface feels like velvet to 
the hand and the handles adapt themselves agree- 
ably to the grasp.* The unglazed bottom shows a 
notable clearness in the execution. 

A similar edging forms the decoration to the 
shoulder of a heavy jar" in the South Kensington 
Museum (6840-60, illustrated in Bushell's ' Chinese 
Art,' Vol. II, fig. 18). This piece also lacks the 
fatal glassy sheen that is inherent in so many of 
the blue porcelains, particularly that of the Chia 
Ching period. The colour of the texture recalls 
old yellowed ivory. The blue is grey-violet ; the 
drawing — the ' four elegant accomplishments ' — is 
full of grace. The shoulder, neck and foot are 
divided by horizontal bands and the groups 
of figures are separated by cloud bands, the 

*The dimensions of this beautiful piece, which may, accord- 
ing to the inscription, have belonged to the Mogul Aurungzib, 
are SJ inches high, 7J inches diameter. The catalogue of the 
exhibition points out that the motive in the decoration as well as 
the shades of the blue were much imitated in the Yung Cheng 
period. In the Ch'ien Lung period also similarly decorated 
pilgrim-bottles were much favoured. The dimensions are 
characteristic of the period : a piece in the Robert Hoe Collec- 
tion, New York, decorated in the style of the Hsuan Te period, 
is 20 inches high ; the object for which it was made was lost 
sight of. 

» A third piece which I would add to this group is a handled 
vase (copied from a bronze model — there is a bronze of similar 
form in the British Museum) in the possession of Mrs. Halsey, 
shown at the Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1910, Case L 14. The 
glaze over the fine grey-blue is very clear and soft ; the unglazed 
bottom shows a white soft paste. Possibly the plate, 1633-76, 
in South Kensington Museum belongs to this group also. 

Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelains 


Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelains 

application of which, with increasing refinement, 
lasted until the Wan Li period (</. Wine-jar, Case X, 
24.=;: Morgan Collection, New York). 

Hsiang docs not illustrate any blue porcelains of 
the Ch'eng Hua period, (1465-1487), because, in 
Dr. Bushell's opinion, he considered them of no 
great value. Mohammedan blue, which could not 
be obtained during this period, was partially re- 
placed by native cobalt of a fine grey shade, but 
even more by the greater skill of the draughts- 

Hsiang mentions that the decorations of por- 
celain wine-cups were sketched by the Court- 
painters. When we remember the prices that 
the Chinese themselves paid even in the sixteenth 
century for these pieces," we must abandon for 
ever the hope of obtaining an historically correct 
idea of the art of the Ch'eng Hua period. We fall 
back on supposition, and could perhaps classify 
the style as pictorially decorative, borrowing 
freely from the art of the kakemono painters. 
The manner of painting with the brush-point 
(shown in the decoration of a circular covered 
cake-box, Bushell Collection, illustrated in Monk- 
house, PI. H, and shown at the Burlington 
Fine Arts Club in 1910, Case E, 38-40) would 
agree with this style. The brush-strokes with 
which flowers. Sung rocks, faces, etc., are painted, 
are marvellously fine, and the young sage 
standing on a dragon (on the inside of the box) is 
memorable for its feminine elegance. If we 
compare the rich, forceful method with that of the 
decorations on the cake-boxes of the earlier K'ang 
Hsi period, pieces often entirely in Ming style with 
their medley of flowers (mostly lotus), human 
figures and animals (mostly ducks on two or 
three small ripples), it must be admitted that at 
least the decorator of the Bushell cake-box comes 
very near to the handwriting of a Ch'eng Hua 

With the Cheng Te period, beginning 1506, we 
enter into a century which began to compete with 
the Mohammedan market both in the application 
of the foreign mineral (Hui Ch'ing), which cost 
double their weight in gold, and also in the 
adaptation to Western taste. Not only the dated 
Cheng Te porcelains in the British Museum,* but 

"Bushell, 'The T'ao Shuo, page 60: 'In the time of the 
Emperor Shen Tsung (Wan-Li, 1573-1619) there used to be 
placed on the table before the emperor a pair of Ch'eng- Hua 
wine-cups which were valued at 100,000 cash. . . ' 

'Brinkley, 'Japan and China,' ix, page 208, illustrates a 
vermilion box, marked Ch'eng Hua, of the soft-paste type, 
decorated with a five-clawed dragon, in grey-blue, which 
coincides more with the Chinese tradition than the light violet- 
grey shade of the Bushell box. The drawing in particular is 
remarkably fine for the period. The piece appears to be- 
though Brinkley gives no information on the subject— in a 
private Japanese collection, which would be evidence for its 

• Illustrated in Dillon, page 95- A vase of similar style, also 
marked Cheng Te, designed from a bronze medal with Arabic- 
Persian inscription as a decoration, is in the Cary Collection, 
New York. Another one is in the Bushell Collection. 


the bronzes of the period also are decorated with 
Arabic inscriptions." The glaze has a glass-green 
tone, particularly noticeable in the hollows. The 
bases of the pieces, very cleanly worked, show the 
typical fat Ming paste and a signature which is 
excellent as caligraphy. The decoration shows a 
noteworthy certainty in the handling of the brush. 
On the middle cylindrical vessel (the shape of 
which is met with again in bronze with Arabic 
inscription) the Mohammedan blue attains to a 
richer working than in the smaller pieces, and its 
tone harmonizes very fairly with the light green 

Various groups of porcelains have been pre- 
served for us from the Chia Ching period, not 
only with Mohammedan blue, but also with 
underglaze painting in Chinese cobalt. The best- 
known type'" — that of the heavy vessels with 
roughly finished bases — is easily classified, both 
by reason of its bulky silhouettes and unshaded 
blue almost of the colour of violet ink. Textile 
motives are preferred as a framing for the 
central decoration which runs panorama-like 
round the vessel, and occasionally even form the 
background of the whole design. There are many 
motives, too, that are characteristic 'properties' of 
the porcelain painters : the Lambrequin borders 
which were reproduced ad nauseam in the K'ang 
Hsi period ; the Y-pattern which Yung Ch'eng and 
Ch'ien Lung, decorators of two hundred years 
later, reproduced and manipulated so brilliantly 
on their finely painted plates ; the seam-motive of 
Chinese robes ; waves dashing against a three- 
pointed rock ; flying cranes and storks amidst 
conventionalized brocade-like clouds ; and, lastly, 
galloping horses. 

We learn from the T'ao Shuo that in order to 
obtain the best tints, Mohammedan blue was not 
used alone but mixed with native cobalt in the 
proportion of 10: i. A tint of lesser quality was 
obtained by a mixture in the proportion of 4:6. 
Herein we may find an explanation of the occur- 
rence of so many different shades of blue. It 
seems to me improbable that Persian blue, which, 
unmixed with foreign mineral, gave a much more 
uniform result, ever suggested itself to the Chinese 
as an ideal (I am thinking now of the faience of 
the sixteenth to seventeenth centuries) : they always 
preferred on the contrary the light grey shades, 
(Hsiian Te ! Wan Li !) to the full blue. The dull 
violet-blue of the big Chia Ching vessels (Jar 96- 
1883 South Kensington Museum is a good 

^ Sir W. Frank's suggestion that these porcelains purchased 
in Pekin were made for a Chinese Mohammedan needs addition 
and expliination. Prof. Friedrich Hirth informs me that until 
recently blue and white porcelains were taken by Chinese 
Mohammedans from Nankin on the pilgrimage to Mecca as 
articles of exchange. Dr. Hirth believes that all such vessels with 
Arabic inscriptions (they occur in bronze, glass and porcelain) 
belong to this commercial type. 

'" This was also copied in Persia. See Jar 2439-2439(1, South 
Kensington Museum, Room 132. 





Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelain 



example) may therefore well be set down as a 
poorer mixture which could hardly come from 
the Imperial Factory. Much nobler in tone 
is the finely-modelled vase with animal-panels 
on a brocade Y-pattern (British Museum, Franks 
Collection, No. 133 [Plate I, a]). It is dis- 
tinguished not only by the high accuracy of the 
drawing, but also by the pure glaze, so that the 
signature, ' Fuh kwei kia ki ' — ' Fine vase for riches 
and honour'— does not seem an exaggeration. 
We may also probably place in this category the 
porcelain stand (probably for water-colours) 
signed Chia-Ching, and presented by Mr. C. H. 
Read to the British Museum. It is decorated in 
Mohammedan blue, of such astonishing brilliance 
that the glance of the connoisseur is immediately 
attracted to it, and is not easily withdrawn. Notable 
in this piece, again, is the clean white glaze and the 
clear cut base, which allow us to see the fine paste. 
The delightfully drawn figurative decoration 
points already to the style of the Wan Li period. 
It is possible that to the refined taste of the 
Chinese even this remarkably effective shade of 

blue did not appear to be the highest perfection 
attainable and they may have endeavoured to 
attain to the muted-grey tone of the Hsuan Te 
period. In the Burlington Fine Arts Club Ex- 
hibition this year there was a melon-shaped jar 
(acquired by Mrs. Halsey in India) decorated with 
the lotus-flower pattern popularized by the K'ang 
Hsi painters and also popular with the cloisonne- 
artists. The soft glow of the glaze kindled in a 
fire tended by a master hand, makes the blue of 
the most beautiful hawthorn vase seem almost 
vulgar by comparison. The blue of this type was 
not always so happily attained : two smaller jars 
in the South Kensington Museum (1619-76 and 
1558-76)" are to be regarded rather as interesting 

During the first half of the sixteenth century 
more richly modelled forms of such jars, in the 
shape of melons, appear to have been popular 
in China and found fame also in India and 

V The litter piece was acquired in Persia, where the type 
was much copied. (See South Kensington Museum, Persian 
Faience, 992, 99211-76, 2892-76, etc.) 


Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelains 

Persia.'- While the typical K'ang Hsi potter 
was ahnost always content with drawn panels 
which he did not work out plastically," the 
Chia Cliiiig potter cuts his way through forms 
and does not restrict the fields thus won to 
the pencil. With a flat surface the composition 
receives through this principle something quaint 
and naU-e as well as all that charm which we 
willingly recognize in primitive works. In such 
a progressive period as the si.xtcenth century (for 
example, the elegant vase, Franks Coll., 133, 
British Museum) the works I have referred to seem 
to me to point to a private or a provincial place 
of origin rather than to the royal factory. A vase 
with globular body and a cylindrical neck widen- 
ing at the mouth (British Museum, Case 54), 
decorated in full native blue with a naive medley 
of symbols, plants and animals, seems to 
strengthen this supposition [Plate I, b]. It 
is signed Fu Fan Chih Tsao, i.e., ' manu- 
factured on the boundaries of Fu Chien,'" 
in the coast province of Fu Chien, which has 
attained to world-wide fame through its blaiic dc 
Chine, ^nd. we may suppose that a large number of 
similar freely decorated porcelains originated in 
provincial factories.'^ Little peculiarities of the Chia 
Ching decorators, which the K'ang Hsi painters, 
who worked for a time in the manner of the Ming 
period, noted carefully, give a certain basis for 
dating. A small plate in the British Museum 
(case 54, shelf 6) in Mohammedan blue, (vith 
ducks on ripples and lotus flowers, has on the 
border between the birds and the plants a pattern 
of dots obviously inserted to fill up [Page 29, a]. 
We find the same pattern on a larger scale, and 
consequently even more naive, in a similar plate in 
the Salting Collection (2447), which is decorated 
with red, green and manganese enamel and under- 
glaze Mohammedan blue [Page 29,3]. Both plates 
are dated, and the last-named is unquestionably 
from the imperial factory.'^ 

12 A piece in South Kensington Museum (60600-1885) with 
Indian cover of repousse silver transferred from India ; another 
in British Museum, No. 143, Case K, Franks Collection, attri- 
buted to the Cheng Te period ; two pieces in Mrs. Halsey's 
collection shown at the Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1910, L 2 
and L 5, both bought in India ; a rather later piece, similar to 
these last in many details of the drawing in Room 132, South 
Kensington Museum, of the blue and white Persian faience, 

^-' One group that was manifestly made for the Persian 
market is an exception to this rule. 

" I am obliged to Mr. R. L. Hobson for the signature on this 

"There is a piece in South Kensington Museum, 1549-76, 
' bought in Persia,' with a decoration of symbols and plants in 
Mohammedan blue carelessly arranged. A ewer in the collec- 
tion of the Duke of Devonshire was exhibited at the Burlington 
Fine Arts Club (Case E21). The decoration of plants here is 
also careless and free ; the spaces are naively filled in with 
lozenges. The form, which again goes back to bronzes for the 
design, appears to be typical of the Chia Ching period. 

'|>The saine dots are found on a large dated, 
decorated in underglaze bk.e with hsh and aquatic plants, in the 
collection of Mr. W. W. Mills exhibited at the Burlington Fine 
Arts Club, 1910 (Case L 3). 

A cake-box in the British Museum (case 54) 
shows that in the last third of the sixteenth century 
the products of this factory had attained to a high 
technical perfection, which seems to us to be 
separated, artistically speaking, by a century from 
the common household articles that pass as 
' Ming.' Even before I had the piece in my hand 
I did not doubt for a moment that this cake box 
[Plate III, a] was a product of the K'ang Hsi 
period, so typical were the blue and the drawing 
of a phoenix surrounded by flames. It is, however, 
signed ' Lung Ch'ing.' The Lung Ch'ing period 
is not looked upon as a famous epoch for blue and 
white porcelain, so that there was no reason for 
the potters of the Wan Li or the K'ang Hsi 
periods to date back their products. And even 
though the colour and composition cannot 
compete with the richer shading and sureness, 
nor yet the texture with the glowing white of the 
noblest K'ang Hsi porcelains, it is still ap; arent 
that the progress made during a century in regard 
to this dexterity was practically a minimum. 

With the accession of the Emperor Wan Li, 
whose extravagant commissions in Ching-te Chen 
endangered the finances of the country, the period 
of wholesale manufacture and also of wholesale 
export begins, as Dr. Sarre has demonstrated 
afresh by his discovery in a mosque at Ardebil of 
500 pieces of porcelain, mostly painted blue, of 
the time of Shah Abbas I and his successors. 
There occur also, it is true, pieces which indi- 
vidually are of great beauty and even of great 
refinement, which are equalled by few of the blue 
porcelains of the K'ang Hsi period and excelled 
by none. 

The commonest type of the Wan Li blue- 
and-white porcelains, the way for which was 
prepared by certain pieces of the Chia Ching 
period, is admittedly not of this refinement. I 
would call it ' the cloisonne type,' since not only is 
the shape, but also the decoration, of the large 
vases borrowed from the cloisonne vessels, which 
in their turn go back to bronze types. It is spread 
over the surface like a mosaic, careless of boss 
and hollow, and the easy motive of dragons and 
phoeni.xes is consequently frequent, because the 
bodies and feathers twist and bend conveniently, 
and the attributes of flames and clouds provide 
a ready means to establish symmetry. The blue 
is sometimes greyish, sometimes vioiet-tinted." 
This type was imitated in Persia,'* although not 
so often as the groups which have yet to be 

" Examples : The large beaker vase with rudimentary 
animals' heads for handles in British Museum (Case K, Franks 
Collection) ; large vase in the Walters Collection, Baltimore, 
illustrated in Bushell, PI. LXXII ; tray for paint brushes, South 
Kensington Museum (97-1883) ; sweetmeat-dish in Mrs. Halsey's 
collection ; covered boxes in the collection of Mr. Max Rosen- 
heim and the Kev. J. F. Bloxham ; the three last shown at the 
Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1910 (Case L, 8, 9 and 15). 

"South Kensington Museum, Room 132 (1178-76,1191-76, 


A. NO. 2471 


n. NO. 2472 



(a) top of cake box, blue UNUERliUAZE DECORA- 




Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelains 

discussed. There is a cup in the British Museum 
decorated with Sanskrit characters/^ dated and 
finely turned, which is evidence of the close rela- 
tions between China and her westerly neighbours. 
This is the more interesting because it is apparently 
painted with Mohammedan blue. The supposition 
that in the Wan Li era this foreign material was 
not obtainable would thus be contradicted. It is 
conceivable, however, that in the Imperial Factory 
a stock would have been laid in. 

Pieces in the collections of Mr. Pierpont 
Morgan and Lord Swaythling which are famous 
for their setting, and one or two other works, 
are decorated in similar style in a good light 
viole(-blue, here and there a little hard through 
lack of shading. They are to be classed among 
the earliest porcelains of the Wan Li period, their 
setting dating from between 1585-1590. The 
drawing is obscurely outlined and then flatly and 
fairly evenly filled in, while the glaze retains alight 
green shimmer. The setting raises them to the 
first rank among ornamental pieces; except for 
this, one of the Burghley House porcelains, a flask 
with birds and brocade-patterns, with its roughly- 
finished foot, its hazy glaze and its poor blue, 
seems somewhat provincial. It is possible that it 
is to be dated back to the Chia-Ching period, and 
in support of this one may adduce its form. A 
companion piece, without setting, is in the South 
Kensington Museum. 

Mr. Pierpont Morgan's beautifully - mounted 
phoenix-bowl (illustrated in Bushell's ' Chinese 
Art,' II, fig. 24), being dated, allows us also to 
place in the Wan Li period the similar lotus-bowl, 
with silver-gilt mounts, in the collection of Lord 
Swaythling'-" (exhibited Budington Fine Arts 
Club, 1910, E. 24), which is marked with a 
Hsuan Te signature hardly fulfilling its claims 
to calligraphy. The South Kensington phoenix- 
bowl (1616-76), signed Chia Ching and decorated 
in blue of the earlier Wan Li period [PAGE 29, c], 
i- similar in type.-^ The custom of dating 
back had at least begun in the Wan Li period : 
we know, in fact, from the Tao lii, the name of 
a Wan Li artist who imitated soft paste Hsiian 
Te and Ch'eng Hua porcelains, together with 
their signatures brilliantly. 

If such a step into the realms of speculation be 
not too confident, I would ascribe the deep bowl 

"A shallow bowl shaped like a lotus-flower, with sixteen 
moulded petals, in the collection of Mr. Trapnell, also has a 
decoration of Sanskrit characters on the outside. An almost 
Japanese variant (lacquers of Koetsu, pots of Kenzan) in the 
South Kensington Museum (1710-18/6, 'bought in Persia'). 
Pine branches are entwined in the form of Chinese characters 
on the outside of this beautifully decorated Wan Li dish, which 
is signed HsiianTe. 

"There is a Persian example in South Kensington Museum 
(Room 132, 8S6-76) of the phoenix bowls, 1439-76. 

»i The perfume vase with cup-shaped mouth supported by six 
arched tubes, decorated with lions playing with a ball, in South 
Kensington Museum (553-78), and the companion piece in the 
collection of Mr. Trapnell, also belong to this group. 

in the Salting Collection (South Kensington 
Museum, No. 2471 [Plate II, a]) to such an 
artist, whose name has quite exceptionally been 
handed down to us. It contradicts the supposi- 
tion, held by all other writers without exception, 
that the Wan Li period only produced blue-and- 
white porcelains of secondary value, and that it 
was a period of decadence. This — and I hope 
to show that it was not the only work of fine 
taste" — exhibits already an unusual delicacy in 
its form, being shaped like the calix of a 
flower. The sides are thin and bend elegantly 
outward at the edge ; the glaze is, for the 
period, of exceptional purity; one or two holes 
have the appearance rather of beauty spots than 
of faults in the baking ; and the blue is of a 
delicate tone tending a little towards indigo, a 
tone which Chinese collectors have always pre- 
ferred to the full blue. The cavity at the base 
is coated with a glaze of a fine cream shade, arid 
shows a signature, Hsiian Te nien chih, in 
accordance vi'ith the tone of the blue. Never- 
theless, the decoration permits us to ascribe it to 
the Wan Li period, and, indeed, to the sixteenth 
century. On the outside there is a pattern of 
bamboos, pine-branches and lizards, with insects 
flying among them. Inside on the edge there 
is a frieze [Page 29, d] of storks and lotus 
(typical of the period). We find it repeated on 
the large plate with mounting of 1585-90, in Mr. 
Pierpont Morgan's collection (ill. Bushell, Vol. II, 
fig. 22) ; in two plates in the collection of Mr. 
W. G. Rawlinson, exhibited at the Buriington 
Fine Arts Club in 1910 (E 4 and E 31) ; and on 
two cups in the Dresden Johanneum, Case 45^, 
A and B. There is also a similar edging ; rows 
of herons, lotus, hares, birds and plants, on a plate 
in Mrs. Halsey's collection. On the bottom, 
inside, there is a medallion [Page 29, e] which 
is also characteristic of the Wan Li period— a bird 
sitting on a rock beside some reeds.-'' Anyone 
who has realized the fact (many never do) 
that the Chinese used their porcelains largely as a 
ground for paintings, and not as pieces of house- 
hold furniture, will find this impressionist nature- 
sketch of the Wan Li artist, the daintiness of this 
decoration, breathed, as it were, upon the surface, 
evidently the work of a single hand, worthy of 
more esteem than can be given to the K'ang Hsi 

=2 In the Dresden Johanneum there is a cup (Case 4S<i B) 
decorated in two shades of delicate grey-blue with birds, 
aquatic plants and general landscape decoration, which is 
signed Hsuan Te, and which might be quite worthy of that 
epoch. I am of opinion that it belongs to the Wan Li period ; 
the author might well be that Sieur Tsui who is referred to m 
the Tao lii— 'his cups were sensibly larger than those of the 
period Hsuan Te and Ch'eng Hua, but in delicacy and beauty 
they were entirely similar.' 

23 This motive also was taken by the Persians for the bottom 
of their blue-painted faience, as for example the bowl in South 
Kensington Museum, Room 132, 1174-76, and the bowl 1843-76, 
in which, moreover, the typical Ming cloud has been intro- 


Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelains 

decorators. It is no wonder that the Persian 
potters put themselves under the yoke of a style 
of such variety and charms. 

A bowl (Salting, 2472, from Burghley House 
[Plate II, b]) which belongs to a larger group 
of porcelains,-' might be by an artist nearly allied 
to this one ; this group also was imitated by 
Persian potters well into the seventeenth century. 
In paste and form they are similar to the bowl 
described above, except that the marks left from 
the wheel were allowed to remain, with a view to 
giving it a wavy profile, with a delicate effect of 

The decoration, in light violet blue, shows on 
the outside in the narrower panels bands radiating 
from a ring shaped like a ju-i head. In the 
broader panels there are plants, fruits and insects, 
delightfully drawn, just as we see them in the 
Chinese coloured woodcuts of the next century, 
which Mr. Laurence Binyon discovered, and in 
Utamaro's 'Insect Book' of two hundred years 
later. The interior of the bowl is similar but 
more sparsely decorated, with plants and stone 
pendants arranged in panels, and on the bottom 
is the favourite Wan Li motive of a bird sitting on 
a rock [Page 29, f]. 

The artists of this group have used their brittle 
material more like flexible metal than porcelain. 
Flasks and cans which at the joins show a " seam " 
more in the nature of a decoration than of in- 
complete workmanship are supported at the mouth 
by highly modelled foliage. The edge of saucers 
and plates is undulating, bent prettily outwards 
and the edges of the panels are accentuated by 
impressions. Two plates in my possession show 
inside the edge-panels a gauffering in the form of 
ling chill. A certain subtlety in the decoration is 
allied to this refinement of form and it served 
doubtless as a model to the decorators of the many- 
bordered eggshell porcelains of the Yung Cheng 
period. The female type — a full, almost pert face 
on a slender neck, the slim body veiled in w-ide 
folded draperies, one leg held up affectedly — seems 
like a reminiscence of the recent Lung Ch'ing 
period-^ which is deprecated by Chinese art 
historians on account of the laxity of the 
representations on its porcelains [Plate III, b]. 
The figures are often placed before a high-legged 

-*In the British Museum three plates (Cases 54 and 55), 
three bowls [Pl.-\te II, c], one four-sided kettle, and a bottle 
which Mr, R. L. Hobson has illustrated in ' Porcelain.' In 
South Kensington Museum a bowl (1620-76 [Page 29, H]), and 
in the collection of Mr. Eumorfopulos a pair of beautiful bottles 
exhibited at the Burlington Fine Arts Club (E8-11). Persian 
imitations, South Kensington Museum (Room 132, bowl 196- 
1884, bowl 183-1883). 

25 The earliest types of this group of porcelains, even if they 
do not belong to the Lung Ch'ing period, must reach back to 
the beginning of the Wan Li period ; a jug of this type is in the 
Berlin Kunstgewerbe Museum, with a mount by the Erfurt 
goldsmith, Georg Berger, whose name is met with till 
1577. A companion piece, unmounted, is in the Dresden 
Johanneum (Case 45a;. 

table, and a screen, behind which is seen a garden 
with the rock-like pierced tree and curved cloud 
[Page 29, g] in the ling chih form*'' — typical of 
Ming decoration and imitated by Persian potters 
ad tiaiiscaiu. 

This type became more and more coarse in 
time, and out of it was evolved the decoration 
of so many vessels in the form of waterpipes, 
large rice-saucers, pear-sh;iped flasks and smaller 
basins, painted with a blue that tends more and 
more towards indigo. They were found mainly 
in India and Persia where the Chinese style was 
accepted as a revelation. The charming animal- 
motives (Salting, 984 [Page 33, a, b, c, d], Bibcron 
in the Queen's audience chamber, Hampton 
Court) the abundant use of brocade motives even 
in unsuitable places (as in the two bottles No. 136 
in case K, British Museum) ; in the saucers and 
plates (South Kensington Museum 538-1888, 762- 
1888, 1723-76, 396-1903, etc.) ; in the British 
Museum (case 55, top shelf) : the strong division 
of the edge into panels filled with symbols and 
fruits, decorated wherever possible with dots, and 
above all with bands and tasseled festoons which 
in carelessly painted pieces build up into a sort 
of group of commas or simply a spiral — all these 
signs make classification, even for the layman, 
an easy task. The original motive dates back in 
any case to some period before 1615. A Persian 
faience plate of typical Wan Li shape and decora- 
tion (brocade pattern on the mouth, ducks, 
bamboos, palms, etc., iu panels) in the British 
Museum (Case 30), in addition to the artist's name, 
bears also the date 1616. Furthermore, we know 
that a large Japanese saucer (South Kensington 
Museum, 3-1886), painted in blue underglaze, 
with a decoration on the edge borrowed from the 
large rice saucers mentioned above, was finished 
in 161 5 to the order of J. P. Koen, Governor of 
the Dutch East India Company. Even in 
Portugal this type served as a pattern, as for 
example in the blue-and-white faience plate 
(South Kensington Museum, 62-1910), which 
actually has the Ming cloud I 

If there were not in existence sundry porce- 
lains of the Wan Li period, we could still very 
well reconstruct the style and motives of this 
type as well as those of the early seventeenth 
century from the blue Persian faiences of the six- 
teenth and seventeenth centuries. On the well- 
known Morgan plate made between 1585-90, 
(reproduced in Bushell, 'Chinese Art,' II, Fig. 22), 
which is also interesting from the fact that in it 

^''The first of these three figures is from central medallion of 
the deep plate in South Kensington Museum, Room 143. The 
plate is in Case II. on the bottom shelf of the case at the far 
end on entering from Room 144. The second is from a plate 
bequeathed by Mrs, Woodcock (396-1903), on the third shelf 
of the same case, near the window. The third is from a dish 
for rice (762-1888) on the bottem shelf in the first case in Room 
143 to the left on entering from Room 144. The cloud is on 
the medallion. 


Towards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelains 

the decoration is already the vvorli of several 
hands, one of the artists has drawn in the round 
central panel a view of an island with naively 
impossible perspective. Between steep rocks of 
the form familiar in Sung pictures stands a 
pagoda, and in the middle on the horizon a two- 
storied temple shows with the moon above it, 
surrounded by a brocade-like cloud in the form 
of a cross. To a slightly later date belongs the 
cup in the South Kensington Museum (336-1884, 
acquired in Persia), which is decorated on the 
outside with birds, wreaths of flowers and a frieze 
of running horses [PAGE 33, f] ; inside, with 
two landscapes and a border made up of 
sacred wheels and ju-i heads [Page 33, E and g]. 
The rocky landscapes with their pagodas, tall 
firs, flags (?) with meadows, flying birds and 
fisher boats with waves that appear like cast 

shadows, made a strong impression on the 
Persian potters and on the Chinese working in 
Persia. For in a large group of faiences in 
underglaze blue we find landscape-themes of this 
kind copied-' or varied.^ These works which 
have hitherto been ascribed rather vaguely as 
pottery of the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries, 
can therefore be set down now with considerable 
probability as belonging to the first half of the 
seventeenth century and not to the sixteenth at all.** 

■-' Dr. W. Kaesbach tells me that in the Brighton Museum 
there is an exact Persian copy in faience of the South Ken- 
sington bowl. 

28 In Room 132, South Kensington Museum, bowl 237-1884, 
basin 2845-76, large saucer 2899-76, bowl, faience, fine, 47o-7« ; 
also a water-pipe in the collection of Sir W. Preece at Wimble- 
don, etc., etc. 

29 A Persian hookah base, South Kensington Museum, 592- 
1889, with animal panels on the belly and a border of ju-i heads 
on the shoulders, is dated 1051 a,h. (a.d. 1640). 


I MONG the immediate pupils 
of Liberale da Verona the 
strongest was, with little doubt, 
Francesco Caroto. He added 
I to a typically Veronese sense 
of colour a first-hand training 
under Mantegna himself. He 

,began as a pure Mantegnesque 

-has possibly even been confused with his master 
at times— and developed in his native city an in- 
dividuality, a peculiarly healthy practice in form 
and colour, often a very real poetic imagination. 
It is therefore not wonderful that his brother 
Giovanni, his junior by about ten years, should be 
known mainly as his imitator. Yet Giovanni 
Caroto, in the scanty collection of his works which 
still remains, proves that he was not quite so lack- 
ing in vitality as is generally assumed. 

Of his biography there is little to be said, and 
that little has been obscured by later writers. 
Saverio dalla Rosa, one of the most active his- 
torians of Veronese monuments, supposed him to 
be the son of Francesco Caroto' ; a modern critic 
has attempted, on false premises, to make him the 
elder brother.'- The only contemporary documents 
yield conflicting results.'' The parish anagraphs of 
San Vitale, Verona, as often in such cases, confuse 
the date of his birth. Nor has the date of his death 
been more fortunate : it has been made to vary 

1 Catasfico delle Pitture e Scolture ... in Verona . . . nell' 
anno 1&03.' Biblioteca Communale, MSS. 1008. 

''G, Biermann in ' Kunstlironik,' December 4th, IQ03. 

^Luigi Simeoni in ' L'Arte,' vii, p. 64-67. The anagraph of 
1514 gives no age ; that of 1529 sets his birth in 1489, that of 
1555 in 1490, that of 1517 and of 1545 in 1491, and that of 1541 
in 1495. 

between 1540 and 1566.* Giovanni's will is dated 
November 15th, 1555, his name appears in an ana- 
graph of that year and henceforward is never found 
again. It was a year of extraordinary catastrophe 
in the Caroto family. Bernardino Caroto, who had 
always lived in the house of his father Francesco, 
seems to have died in the early spring ; Francesco 
himself died a few months later; and Giovanni, his 
brother, died before the winter ended. 

Possibly Giovanni's circumstances allowed him 
to be a dilettante painter. He had leisure to illus- 
trate and later to edit a famous Veronese book on 
architecture : his preface seems to imply that it 
was not the work of his profession.'* The Caroto 
family, moreover, held quite a good position in 
Verona. Francesco owned a chemist's shop (and is 
indeed called ' sptzierius ' in some documents) and 
house property in Casale and elsewhere,* besides 
considerable rights in the Veronese market place. 
He had five assistants (garzoni di boiega), and it is 
therefore not safe to attribute every inferior picture 
which shows marks of his style to Giovanni. 

In point of fact the only allusion to his circum- 
stances — and it is a peculiarly interesting one — is 
by Vasari : 'Giovanni finalmente d'anni sessanta 
in circa, essendo vivuto senza figliuoli e senza 
ambizione e con buone facolta, si mori ; essendo 
molto lieto per vedere alcuni suoi discepoli in 
buona reputazione — cio^ Anselmo Canneri e Paolo 

< 1540— Scipione Maffei : 'Verona lUustrata,' 1732; 1555— 
Dal Pozzo: ' Vite degli artisti veronesi,' 1718; after 1560— 
Milanesi notes to Vasari, Vol. v, 1880; 1566?— B. Berenson ; 
' North Italian Painters,' 1907. 

' Essendomi gia molto tempo per spasso ed utilila dell' 
architettura et anchora dilettato di investigar . . .' 

* A, Vesme : ' Fr. Caroto alia Corte di Monferrato' in 'Archivio 
Storico dell' Arte,' viii, p. 33-42. 


Giovanni Qaroto 

Veronese die nggi lavoia in Venczia cd c ten u to 
buon maestro.' " Vasari had personal relations 
with Giovanni, and should speak with authority, 
although the first mention of Paolo Caliari in 
Veronese documents is in the anagraph of the 
painter Antonio Badile in 1541, where he appears 
as 'Paulus eius discipulus seu Garzonus— (anni) 


I. Certain Works. 
Giovanni Caroto has a remarkable penchant for 
hiding his signature, (i) In the S. Paolo altar- 
piece it appears on a tiny scroll of paper in the 
foreground, rediscovered in cleaning the picture a 
century ago.' It bears the name 'loanes' in 
minuscule and a date said to be MUXIII, and 
once apparently the monogram which he uses 
elsewhere, though I can find no recognisable trace 

of this. The monogram 

is also used 

by Francesco Caroto at least twice.* This form 
of the name — KROTO— is often used by Francesco, 
and Giovanni even uses CKROTO (in the MSS. 
of his book). (2) In the S. Giovanni-in-Fonte 
picture he conceals his minute signature lOANNES 
in black on a dark leaf behind the Madonna's 
head. The scroll with ' loannes 5 MDXIIH' 
mentioned by Crowe and Cavalcaselle,' is no doubt 
a confusion with the S, Paolo picture. 

I. Verona: S. Paolo di Campo Marzo — behind 
high altar. 
Madonna enthroned with St. Paul and St. Peter. 

[Plate, a.] 
Canvas. 14 ft. h. by 7 ft. 3 ins. w. (4,26 by 

2,38). , . ^ 

Before the discovery of the obscure signature, 
this picture was universally attributed to Girolamo 
dai Libri. The schematic composition of the 
figures, the baldacchino and arch with hanging 
lamp, and the detailed landscape are in fact distinct 
echoes of Dai Libri and Francesco Morone. 

The Madonna herself is a noble figure, fit to 
rank beside those of Dai Libri, for a splendid 
sanity and physical health which is a special 
characteristic of Cinquecento Veronese painting. 
Her manner of holding the rather unattractive 
child is found constantly repeated in Verona for 
a century. It originated in Mantegna's great 
triptych in the basilica of San Zeno, copied almost 
literally by Francesco Benaglio, among Mantegna's 
Veronese contemporaries, and never quite forgotten 
by the local school. 
The two saints, standing in rather strained Peru- 

'Cf. Da Persico : ' Descrizione di Verona,' 1820, II, 26. 

'Raising of Lazarus (1531— now in Archbishop's Palace, 
Verona) and the Holy Family of the Crespi collection, Milan. 

•Crowe and Cavalcaselle: ' History of Painting in N. Italy," 
1871, 1, p. 486. The sign before the date is clearly a misreading 
of Giovanni's monogram. 

ginesque attitudes, do not call for special comment 
except that the head of St. Paul is curiously like 
the rude drawing of the artist himself in the 
MSS. of his book. 

The colour of the picture,with its pale landscape, 
the quiet draperies of the Virgin, golden cloak of 
St. Peter and silver-grey carpet of the throne, is 
not unlike Francesco Caroto in certain works : 
the scarlet cloak of St. Paul is a discordant note. 

Zanandreis,'" supposing Giovanni to have been 
born in 1495, objects to the date 1513, which is 
said to have accompanied the signature, and 
attributes the picture to the elder Caroto. It does 
indeed seem over early for this the largest of 
Giovanni's known works. 

2. Verona : S. Giovanni in Fonte — entrance wall. 
Madonna enthroned with St. Martin{l), St. 

Stephen and a Donor. [Plate, b.] 
Canvas. 6 ft. h. by 4 ft. Sins. w. (1,83 by 

^''^-)- . ^. . , ,.. 

In this painhng Giovanni, as we know him, 

reaches his greatest originality and his highest 
technical achievement. He has produced a pic- 
ture which could not be attributed to any of the 
well-known masters of the Veronese school. It 
was given, therefore, quite irresponsibly, in the 
eighteenth century (and in most later guide-books) 
to Dionisio Battaglia, a painter who — except for 
a damaged fresco on a house-front in Verona — is 
nothing but a name. The discovery of a minute 
lOANNES in the background first gave the clue 
to its identity. 

There is indeed nothing in the colour of the 
picture and little in the forms which is specifically 
Carotesque. The hand of Giovanni is only 
recognisable in details, the inclination of the 
Madonna's head, the sidelong glance of St. Stephen, 
the clumsy shoes of the standing saints, the deep 
landscape with its wealth of romantic incident. 
The actual composition is a dim reminiscence of 
Girolamo dai Libri, with the one positive touch of 
his lemon-bush behind the Madonna's throne. 
Yet it lacks completely his flowing ease. The 
main figures are self-conscious, the Madonna is 
posed in too obvious discomfort. Perhaps the 
most satisfying figure is that of the donor, a 
portrait touching in its truthfulness. The old 
man, with full sunshine on his cropped hair and 
reflected light over his face, kneels before the 
Child, casting his shadow up to the foot of the 
throne. He is felt at once as somehow not 
germane to the picture, representing even a form 
of realism new in Veronese art. A close exami- 
nation shows, indeed, that he was in some sense 
an afterthought— painted over the completed 

Giovanni's interest has been far more in detail 

"Zanandreis : ' Le vite dei pittori , 
p. 69. 

, veronesi' (1S31), 1891, 


Giovanni Qaroto 

han in general lines of composition. The first 
glance is bound to be attracted by the robes of the 
Madonna, her orange dress and pale blue cloak. 
They are an experiment in colour ; more especially 
they are an experiment in a new textile, and a rather 
bewildering series of drapery folds is the conse- 
quence. In the S. Paolo altar Giovanni Caroto 
gave us the richness of heavy silk; here he is 
absorbed in the achievement of finely woven 
material with the sheen of satin. Francesco 
Morone had painted thin fabrics woven with gold, 
Brusasorci attempted veils of diaphanous silk, but 
the complete mastery of brilliant silk such as this 
is given to Paolo Caliari alone of the Veronese 
tradition. Behind the Madonna's head is another 
strange detail — a halo which seems to be rotating 
rapidly in gleaming rings of gold. 

The landscape is overcrowded with romantic 
interest, and misses the pale, mysterious distances 
of Francesco Caroto. On the right two horsemen 
enter a wooded valley, on the left a steep hill is 
built up with ruined arches and dark trees to a 
stereotyped castle on the summit : near the foot a 
peasant waters his ox at a fountain and stands 
conversing with a girl in the sun ; still further down 
two shepherds with wide hats and scarlet hose rest 
on a green lawn. 

This is the most interesting of Giovanni's extant 
pictures, because it is full, rather overfull, of touches 
which are strange to the Veronese painting of his 
time — small ideas possibly, but capable of a lasting 
extension if only he had had the perseverance and 
the skill. 

3. Verona : Museo Civico No. 239. 
Man and Woman Praying. 
Canvas. 2 ft. 8 ins. h. by I ft. 9 ins. w. 
(80 by 53). 

The canvas, which is in very poor condition, is 
clearly only a fragment of a larger picture, in other 
words, the donors kneeling at the foot of an altar- 
piece. Giovanni's will leaves directions for his 
burial in the Church of S. Maria in Organo," and 
he is known to have painted a picture for the altar 
above his tomb. This is described by Vasari and 
later biographers as a Madonna enthroned, with 
St. Nicholas, with portraits of Giovanni and his 
wife Placidia.^'- Its place is now filled by a splendid 
canvas of Savoldo. May we take it that this frag- 
ment in the Verona Museum is a part of Giovanni's 
picture ? 

The painting was still in its place in 1720," but 
Maffei in 1731 notes that it had been removed. 

'1 ' In monumento per eum constructo in ecclesia Sancte 
Marie in Organis, ante eius capellam sub vocabulo Sancti 

"S. dalla Rosa, op. cit., says 'by Giovan Francesco Caroto 
and by his wife, Placidia' (!) 

"Lanceni : ' Recreazione Pittorica," etc., 1720. Chiusole : 
' Itinerario delle pitture,' etc., 1782, speaks of it as still in situ, 
but he was copying from obsolete guide-books. 

For a century nothing more is recorded of it ex- 
cept by hearsay. A small piece of evidence has 
just been produced which places what was only a 
reasonable suggestion beyond the possibility of 
doubt — the picture is included in a sale catalogue 
of i8ig with an unequivocal description.^' What 
prompted the removal and mutilation of the altar- 
piece it is impossible to say. 

The swarthy face of the man with its black beard 
should be compared with the drawing in Caroto's 
book, with Sf. Paul in the S. Paolo altar, perhaps 
even with St. Stephen in S. Giovanni in Fonte. 
The woman wears the headdress of all Giovanni's 
female portraits. 

4. Verona : Museo Civico, No. 265. 

Vision of the Madonna; St. Lawrence and St. 

Canvas. 5 ft. 7 ins. h. by 3 ft. 10 ins. w. (1,69 
by 1,17). 
An unattractive picture, harsh in colourandangu- 
larin drawing. Thedraperyofthesaintsisverystiff ; 
the white robe of St. Lawrence curves outwards in 
a starched fold at his feet in a manner peculiar to 
Giovanni Caroto. 

Only the landscape has not a little of Francesco 
Caroto's charm, but is less mysterious. It seems 
to represent a favourite background of the two 
brothers — the Valpolicella seen from the western 
heights of Verona, with the Moscal rock of Affi 
and Monte Baldo in the distance. 

5. Verona : S. Stefano — altar of right transept. 

Vision of the Madonna; St. Peter and St. Paul. 
Canvas. 7 ft. 4 ins. h. by 5 ft. w. (2,22 by 1,52). 
The composition is similar to the last, but much 
more successful. The figures are more robust, the 
colour warmer and more harmonious, the land- 
scape, with its brown valley-fields and roads, and 
the jagged blue hills in the distance, is beautiful. 
A slender yellow tree in the middle distance is 
reminiscent of Francesco. Probably suggested 
by Girolamo dai Libri's treatment of the same 
subject (Verona Museum, No. 333 — from S. 
Andrea). It is a work of Giovanni's late and 
most finished period. 

6. Verona ; S. Giorgio in Braida — choir arch. 


Canvas. Each 14 ft. iiins. h. by 3 ft. 8 ins. 
w. (4,58 by 82). 
{a) On the left the Angel Gabriel with dark red 
wings. In the background trees and a house 
against a sunset sky. (d) On the right the Virgin 
standing at her desk. The condition of the can- 
vases is bad. For about two feet the top of each 

"Sale catalogue of Luigi Lazzaro Anselmi's collection; 
' No. 146. Li ritratti di Giovanni Carotto e di Placidia sua 
moglie, mezze ligure, citati dal Vasari nella tavola ch'era in 
S. Maria in Organo.' In 1820 in house of the sisters Bordoni 
(Da Persico, op. cit.), then of Pietro Monga. 



Giovanni Qaroto 

picture is stripped of p.iint and seems to be a later 
addition. The drapery of the angel is specially 
weak, the Virgin is an awkward figure with dis- 
proportionately long arms. 1 can find no trace 
of tlie traditional dite, 1508, but the pictures 
certainly suggest very early work. 

7. Verona : S. ^^aria della Scala— near 3rd altar 

(a) Si. Gregory, St. Paul and St. Joseph : four 

Canvas. 4 ft. 4 ins. h. by 3 ft. 9 ins. w. (1,33 
by 1,14). 

(b) Lunette: the Annunciation. 

Canvas, i ft. 7 ins. h. by 3 ft. 9 ins. w. (48 by 

This picture is not mentioned by Mr. Berenson, 
but is nevertheless a very characteristic work. 
St. Gregory has the curious 'starched' fold at the 
foot of his white robe and the clumsy shoe of 
Giovanni's other pictures. The head of St. Paul 
is again strikingly like that in the S. Paolo altar : 
both saints have the dark indefinite beards, the 
dark eyes heavily shadowed under. The heads of 
the donors — two men on the left, apparently father 
and son, and two women on the right — look up 
in pure profile. Compare the headdress of the 
younger woman with that of Placidia and other por- 
traits. The Madonna and Angel of the Annuncia- 
tion are in half figure ; behind them is a glimpse 
of Caroto's misty hills. The picture was formerly 
in the church of S. Tomio (now suppressed). 


HE British Museum has 
recently acquired a St. Chris- 
topher of striking design and 
large dimensions, which, like 
all the surviving woodcuts of 
the early Dutch school, ex- 
cept the best known pieces of 

Lucas van Leyden, is of the 

utmost rarity. In this case, I know of two other 
impressions, in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris,i 
and in the Albertina at Vienna.^ I have once be- 
fore had occasion to mention this woodcut briefly,' 
but solely with reference to the cutter ; it is other- 
wise undescribed. The London impression is not 
in perfect preservation, having suffered by a crease 
across the middle. The hermit's hand and lantern 
and several other small pieces in the same part of 
the print are made up by hand. The indication 
of St. Christopher's left foot beneath the surface 
of the water is no part of the woodcut itself, but 
a superfluous addition made with pen and ink. 
Lastly, a much more important and regrettable 
defect is the absence of the whole right lower 
corner, which has been torn off and made up ; the 
empty space has been plausibly filled by a stone 
of the restorer's own invention. Our reproduction 
[Page 49], therefore, besides being greatly reduced, 
does not give an entirely faithful rendering of the 
St. Christopher in its original condition. 

All those who have seen it have agreed with me 
in ascribing the design unhesitatingly to the 
Dutch school of the beginning of the sixteenth 

'Ea. 25d., p. 94. This impression, somewhat reduced in 
height, measures 370 by 268 mm. 

" Under the name of Jost de Negker. This impression 
measures 383 by 268 mm., and has for watermark a small bull's 
head with tau cro?s (height with cross, 61 mm.). The London 
impression measures 15^ by io| inches, or 388 by 269 mm., 
measured across the middle and including the wide border line ; 
its watermark is a Gothic ' />.' 

' Repertorium fiir Kunstwissenschaft, 1898, xxi, 381, No. 2. 

century. It is difficult, however, to suggest a more 
precise attribution. The two chief masters of 
that school and period whom we know by name 
as designers of woodcuts, Lucas van Leyden and 
Jacob Cornelisz of Amsterdam, are equally out of 
the question. The complicated folds of the mantle 
where it hangs round the pole, the quaintly 
divided beard, and the whole character of the 
landscape are inconsistent with the style of the 
Leyden and the Amsterdam master alike. Dr. 
Franz Diilberg, to whom I sent a photograph of 
the woodcut, has made the interesting suggestion 
that the design may be by Cornelis Engebrechtsz, 
or Engelbrechtsen, of Leyden (1468-1533). Writing 
at a distance from any material for comparison 
and relying on his memory, he calls attention to 
the attitude of the legs, the cast of the drapery, and 
the peculiar drawing of the left hand resting on 
the hip, as characteristic of this master. Aided by 
such reproductions of Engelbrechtsen's paintings 
as are accessible to me, I find a certain amount of 
support for the attribution, but do not venture to 
adopt it definitely ; I commend it, however, to 
the serious attention of more experienced students 
of this group of artists than I can myself pretend 
to be. With the head of St. Christopher, whose 
turban, by the way, reminds me of Abraham's in 
a rare woodcut by Lucas van Leyden (B. 3), 
I find analogies in the Abraham of one of 
the wings of the Leyden Calvary^ — notice 
also the drapery of this figure — and in the 
reclining figure of Lord Northbrook's picture 
exhibited in 1902 at Bruges.'^ The attitude of the 
figure in general reminds me of the man with 
plumes in his hat who stands beneath the right- 
hand cross in Frau Bachofen-Burckhardt's Calvary 

* Diilberg, FriihhoUander I, Taf. 3, 

^ Friedlander, Meisterwerke der Niederlandischen Malerei, 
etc., 1903, Taf. 87. 


X > 

3 3 

O m 

a - 

z ^ 

3 % 

2 i- 





An Early Dutch Woodcut of St. Qhristopher 


An Early Dutch IJ^ooikut of St. Qhristopher 

at Basle, exhibited at Diisseldoif in 1904.' The 
legs are remarkably like those of the thief on the 
same cross, and those of the man standi njj on tiie 
extreme right in the Mockuu^ of Christ at Leyden.' 
But the landscape makes a difficulty. Dr. Diilberg 
suggests tiiat it may have been coarsened and 
conventionalized by the woodcutter, but I hardly 
feel that this accounts for the difference, especially 
in the character of the buildings and formation of 
the trees.' I should be more inclined to suppose that 
the whole landscape background was the invention 
of the woodcutter, who took the figure from the 
design of Cornells Engelbrechtsen or some other 
painter of importance. 

I pass on now to the woodcutter himself, and 
here we are on surer ground, for this is one of 
the cases, quite rare at so early a date, in which the 
woodcutter has put his signature on the block. 
I have already mentioned that the stone in the 
right hand corner is only due to a clumsy restora- 
tion ; it is in fact a pen and ink copy of the 
genuine stone on the left. In place of it we see, in 
the Paris and Albertina impressions, themonogram, 

^ which appears to be composed of the letters 
-yAL 'Jst,' an abbreviation for ' Jost ' or'Jobst' 

N^ (Justus), and is the mark of the famous 
' woodcutter Jost de Negker, afterwards em- 
ployed at Augsburg as the head of a whole work- 
shop employed in cutting the blocks for the Em- 
peror Maximilian's woodcut publications. When 
he had any spare time for private work, Jost 
de Negker was apt to employ it, I am afraid, 
in pirating the works of other artists. Besides legiti- 
mate work, by which I mean designs on the block 
given to him in the first instance to cut, he also 
produced copies after already existing woodcuts, 
and even engravings, by Beham, Burgkmair, Cran- 
ach, Diirer, Holbein and others.' His monogram 
appears not only in its present form, standing alone, 
but also between the letters ' d,' or 'de,'and ' n.' 

Jost de Negker was a native of Antwerp, but till 
a few years ago no work of his earlier than the 
period of his activity at Augsburg was known to 
exist. I can now point to at least three woodcuts 
of his earlier days in the Netherlands, perhaps 
four, for I am now sceptical about the assumed 
derivation of the Temptation of St. Anthony which 
I published in the ' Repertorium ' '" from the engrav- 
ing dated 1520, then in the Lanna collection. It is 

»Taf. 60 in Bruckmann's illustrated publication, 1905. 

"Fruhhollander I, Taf. 4. 

* No authenticated woodcuts by Cornells Engelbrechtsen exist, 
nor have any, to my knowledge, been attributed to him. The 
' houtsnee prenten' in Gothic taste mentioned in a footnote to 
Vol. i, p. 65, of Jacobus de Jongh's edition of Carel van Mander, 
1764, are attributed not to him. but to his father, Engelbrecht, 
who is called in the index a ' Plaatsnijder.' These so-called 
woodcuts are, however, nothing else but the engravings of the 
master E. S., dated 1466 and 1467. 

5 A fuller list of his woodcuts than exists elsewhere will be 
found in the forthcoming second volume of my catalogue of 
German and Flemish woodcuts in the British Museum. 

i» XXI, 380. 


improbable that this coarse piece of work, which 
is signed on a tablet by Jost de Negker, is later in 
date than his tine Augsburg woodcuts after 
Burgkmair and others. The more acceptable 
theory that it is one of his early woodcuts, before 
1508, requires, however, the assuinption that the 
woodcut and engraving known to us are both 
derived from an unknown common original. 
This question must accordingly be left open. 

The most important woodcut by Jost de Negker 
after a Dutch master is St. Martin, published in 
March, 1508, in the Utrecht Breviary printed by Jan 
Severs at Leyden, which was first described and 
attributed to Lucas van Leyden by Dr. Diilberg, 
while I myself explained the signification of the 
woodcutter's mark which it bears." The second is 
the anonymous S/.C/ins/o/>/;6T now under discussion. 
The third is a woodcut of no artistic importance, 
which only concerns us here as a document bearing 
on this early stage of Jost de Negker's career. 
In 1906 I saw in the Kestner Museum at Hanover'^ 
a large woodcut musical diagram,''' partly coloured 
red and yellow, with the tide Principium et ars 
tocius mnsicc [Plate] on a scroll to the right, and 
explanations printed with type. The sheet also 
contains tablets bearing a two-fold dedication 
by one Joannes Franciscus Ferrariensis, of the 
Seraphic {i.e., Franciscan) Order, to Isabella, 
Marchioness of Mantua, and Frederick, eldest son 
of the Marquis of Mantua, who was born in 1500. 
It is, therefore, evidently copied from an Italian 
original and its date must be between 1500 and 
1508." At the foot is a third tablet containing 
the rnonogram of Jost de Negker, as given above 
between the letters 'de' and 'n,' and on either 
side of it a coat-of-arms, to left that of the Empire, 
to right that of the city of Antwerp. These 
details, unfortunately, are almost invisible in the 
much reduced reproduction, the original being 
heavily coloured in this place. Here, then, we 
seem to have found, for the first time, a work 
produced by Jost de Negker at his native place. 
In 1508 he forsook the Netherlands and settled 
permanently at Augsburg, where he produced 
before the end of the saine year the fine pair of 
chiaroscuro woodcuts after Burgkmair represent- 
ing St George and the Emperor Maximilian. It 
is "not my purpose here to pursue him during the 
more illustrious part of his career, but only to call 
attention to what I have been able to trace of his 
more obscure beginnings. 

^^ Repertorium, XXI, 37, with reduced reproduction, and 
377; iJi!rf XXIII, i46,No. 2. 

'^Culemann collection, ' Einbliitter,' ii, 497. 
18463 by 307 mm. 

1' A broadside of the same size and composition, published ' In 
Roma per Antionio Strambi,' without date, is in the British 
Museum (Music, 1600,49, under the name ' lO.^NNES Francis- 
cus Ferrariensis '). Two other versions , a woodcut published in 
the sixteenth century by Gadaldini at Modena, and a later 
engraved copy, are in the Liceo Musicale at Bologna (Gaspari 
and Parisini, ' Catalogo,' 1, 220). For this information I am 
indebted to Mr. W. Barcl.iy Squire, F.S.A. 


example of a late Gothic 
chasuble has just been dis- 
covered in Devonshire, 
land has been generously 
restored to the parish church 
of St. Peter, Barnstaple, to 
.which there is good reason 
to suppose that it originally belonged. The 
name of the donor, a member of a local family 
coincides with one of sIk names of wardens and 
sidemen which are attached to an inventory of that 
church ' maid the iiij day of October, and in the 
fyveth year of the raiggne of o'r Souveraine lady 
Elizabeth ... of all such ornamentes as aper- 
teneth unto the said church.'' A previous entry 
records that certain vestments belonging to the 
church were sold by the parishioners 'for what 
valewe they know not,' which shows that at the 
period they were not jealously guarded for sacred 
purposes. Three white chasubles are named in 
the inventory, *a chisapell of whit damaske, a 
chisapell of white Allixander, another of whit 
fosteyn.' It seems not unlikely that the newly found 
vestment is the one referred to as 'a chisapell of 
whit damaske.' [Plate] It is of a shape consider- 
ably cut away for the arms, and is decorated by both 
orphreys and ' powderings.' The orphreys take 
the form of a Latin cross on the back, and of a 
pillar on the front. The chasuble is made of rich 
white brocaded silk-damask, whilst the orphreys 
are of silk-velvet of fine quality which has now 
assumed a dull gold shade, but was originally, as 
may be seen beneath the embroidery, of a beauti- 
ful soft shade of rose-pink, bordering on the 
colour known as ' old rose,' but produced by a 
purer and more brilliant dye than that in modern 
use. The vestment is edged by a band of satin- 
brocade, the ground of which is rose, the design 
yellow with touches of blue and green. The 
materials are joined beneath silk galloons, the one 
between the border and the white damask, of bluish 
green, while the one which edges the orphreys has 
longitudinal stripes of bright colours. 

The embroidery consists of designs worked 
in silk and gold thread, and afterwards applied 
to the material of both vestment and orph- 
rey. The rays of glory, sprays, and tendrils 
which form links in the scheme of decoration 
are worked directly on to the material. Upon 
the cross and about the angels these are all 
yellow laid down with gold, whilst those about the 
remaining flowers are red. Iridescent paillons are 
used for the rays of glory, and also for the sprays 
from the conventional flowers ; the subdued pearly 
shades of these have a beautiful effect. The most 
elaborate embroidery is displayed upon the back 

' Reprint of the Barnstaple Records by J. R. Chanter and 
Thos. Wainwright. 

of the vestment. At the intersection of the cross 
is a figure of the Blessed Virgin and Child. She 
has a blue halo and a crown of gold thread with 
paillons. She wears a green robe, the colour 
symbolic of regeneration and hope, and a mantle 
of gold thread laid over white, which is edged and 
lined with ermine. She holds a golden lily-shaped 
sceptre. The Holy Child's nimbus is green and 
His dress is of gold thread. He holds in His left 
hand a green sphere, and with His right touches 
the morse of the Blessed Virgin's mantle. The 
hair of both figures is of yellow silk, and the faces 
are worked vertically in split-stitch. There is no 
attempt to mould the features, as was usually done 
in earlier English embroidery, by pressing with 
small heated iron knobs. All the containing and 
emphasizing lines are worked in black outline- 
stitch. The remaining ornament of the cross 
consists of three fleur-de-lys in gold thread and a 
more elaborate conventional flower. Disposed 
about the cross on the silk of the chasuble are 
four angels and six conventional flowers of three 
designs. Each of the angels has a green nimbus 
and a body of laid gold thread, in places slightly 
padded to produce undulations of surface. Their 
principal wings are worked in a laid stitch of silk, 
which although much faded shows traces of its 
original rose-pink colour. On this ground there 
are 'eyes' worked perfectly flat, in blue silk out- 
lined with yellow on white quills. The outer 
feathers of the wings are turned over upon them 
and worked in gold thread to correspond with the 
angels' bodies. They all wear ermine collars. 
The faces are worked vertically in split-stitch like 
those of the Madonna and Child, and the legs 
and feet are white and in the same stitch. The 
front of the chasuble is decorated with conven- 
tional flowers, principally pineapples, having 
cones of blue silk crossed spirally with gold 

At South Kensington Museum the embroidery 
of a cope dated about 1500 (No. 1376-1901) and 
that of a chasuble of early sixteenth century (No. 
4045-1856) bears a striking resemblance, in the 
method of execution and in some of the designs, 
to the work on the Barnstaple vestment, and it is 
probable that this belongs to the same period.''' 

Certain details point to the belief that the 
chasuble has been adapted to its present form. 
On either side of the pillar, at uneven distances 
from the lower edge of the vestment, are joins in 
the damask which cut into the scroll-work of the 
design. The orphreys are not laid upon the 
damask, but meet it at their edge, and the cross 
impinges upon two of the flower-designs. On the 
left-hand side of the back, just below the arm of 

'^Comparison may also be made with the fragment of a cope 
preserved at Othery, Somerset. ' Proceedings, Someriet 
Archaeological Society,' Vol. xliii, Pt. I, p. 48. 


A Mediaeval Qhasuhle at Barnstaple 

the cross, are two small patches in the damask ; 
the position of the larger is indicated by a red 
scroll over the head of the an<iel, that of the 
smaller by a break in the centre of the three rays 
of glory near the anisic of the cross. On exami- 
nation of the back of the damask both these 
patches show that they were made from material 
which, before it was in its present position, had 
already been embroidered ; this argues the exist- 
ence of more silk similarly embroidered from 
which they could have been cut. 

With the chasuble were found a stole and 

maniple of green silk (3 inches wide spreading at 
the ends to 5^ inches), the ornament of which 
associates 'the Passion of Christ' with ' the Passion 
of the Blessed Virgin.' This of itself would indi- 
cate a late Gothic period. At one end of both, 
within a rayed circle, is a Latin cross over I.H.S., 
beneath which are two nails ; in a similar circle at 
the other end are the letters M.R.A., with a crown 
above and a heart pierced by a sword below. 
The stole has evidently been much shortened, for 
it is joined, and the usual small cross is now 
decentrahzed by some 15 inches. 




Gentlemen, — Will you allow me to return to 
the subject of the MiiioTa statuette which was 
reproduced in The Burlington Magazine, 1909' ; 
and for which Mr. F. Lippmann then proposed 
the name of Benvenuto Cellini? I ventured, in 
the following December number, to oppose this 
view, and to put in a plea for Jacopo Sansovino. 
It may interest your readers to learn that I have 
since been able to identify the companion figure 
of this bronze in a statuette of Mercury, of which 
I know two examples. That from which the 
accompanying photograph is taken belongs to the 
Stuttgart Alterthiimer Museum, into which it 
passed, early in the nineteenth century, from the 
Royal Schatzkammer [Plate]. The inventories 
of the old Wurtemburg collections are most 
defective, and we can trace the statuette no 
further. Still, we know that the greater part of 
these treasures came from the castle of Montbeliard, 
near Belfort, which had belonged, from the early 
years of the fifteenth century, to the then Ducal 
House of Wurtemburg, and was comprised in the 
territory ceded to P'rance in 1801. I may state, 
without betraying any secret, that it was in Stuttgart, 
also, that the Minerva reappeared. 

That the Minerva and the Mercury must origin- 
ally have formed a pair and stood together, there 
can be no doubt. The two statuettes are of the 
same height (53 cm.). Both have the same odd 
egg-shaped oval base, sloping toward the front, 
where the forward foot is planted firmly, while the 
other rests tip-toe on the raised edge behind. This 
base is of one piece with the figure. Its most 
singular form is not repeated in any other Renais- 
sance bronze that I know. These tangible and 
incontrovertible facts will prove the connexion of 
the two bronzes better than any argument based 
on their more abstract features. For the intimate 
language of aesthetics is not meant for hearers at 
large. And again, the blunt statement of an obvious 

1 Burlington Magazine, Vol. xvi, pp. 2, 40, 165, October 
and December, 1909. 

fact, made in good faith, argues more forcibly 
than any message of delusive photographs, that 
inevitably distorts the work of art, and sculpture 
most especially. Yet I will ask my readers to 
examine these figures from another point of 
view. Whether this be the closer or the more 
remote they must decide for themselves. Ob- 
serve, then, the existence of certain traits in 
these figures, which seem opposite to what 
we are led to expect from the sexes of the 
deities represented. I find in this an argument 
in favour of their being twin-born works of 
Sansovino. Minerva is the more forcible and 
masculine, in her bearing of a soldier, when 
compared with her companion Mercury, whose 
languid walk ill fits the swift messenger and 
accomplice of thieves and merchants! This 
transposition of the sex-temperaments need not 
surprise us. For no master could learn the whole 
of the lessons that Michelangelo had taught; and 
Sansovino is also an exception among sculptors 
in that he benefited at all by the examples of his 
giant contemporary. The pupil of the elegant 
Andrea Contucci di Monte Sansovino, he had 
already inherited from his master a rare sense of 
grace in line and movement. His early works 
(among which I would include these two bronzes) 
then show Michelangelo's influence in the new, 
solemn splendour of the female figures. For 
Michelangelo saw nothing sheerly sentimental 
in the feminine element. With him woman was 
not to be raised above the level of common mor- 
tality by the soft side of her nature. She must 
transcend her sex, and acquire the masculine power 
of brain and body, to which alone he allowed any 
true virtue. Now Sansovino held easier views. 
He admits either sex. He does more: he con- 
founds them. So his somewhat decadent gods 
shift their natures at pleasure. Still, Minerva, 
descending straight from the Florentine Olympus 
of the early Cinquecento, is not any less martial 
and stately-wise for her feminine comeliness. 
Mercury, on the other hand, could on no account 
have deserved Michelangelo's approval. 
There is in the Imperial Museum at Vienna a 









Letters to the Editors 

second example of the Mercury, agreeing in every 
least feature with the other at Stuttgart. Dr. von 
Schlosscr, the distinguished scholar in charge of 
this section of the Austrian crown collections, has 
reproduced this bronze, and described it in his 
recent publication: 'Werke der Kleinkunst in der 
Skulpturensammlung des Allerh: Kaiserhauses ' 
He is satisfied to leave it unnamed, finding in the 
master indications both of Cellini and Sansovino. 
I must, however, state, the existence of the replica 
at Stuttgart, and of the companion Minerva in 
England, were unknown to him, until after the 
publication of his book, when I had the pleasure 
of discussing these new data with him, and of 
learning that his views had now been modified. 

I was in turn much interested to be shown by 
Dr. von Schlosser, on this recent visit to Vienna, the 
plaster cast of yet another bronze Mercury, which 
is now housed in the museum at Stockholm, 
having, as Dr. von Schlosser states, in all likeli- 
hood, come with the war-loot from Prague. It is 
twice the size of the Vienna-Stuttgart model, and 
while resembling the latter closely, still shows a 
difference in the general balance and movement 
of the lines and in some other relevant features. 
The presence of two examples of the smaller Mer- 
cury, and their unquestionable connexion with 
the Minerva, points to these being the earlier 
works, of which the Stockholm figure then proves 
to be a later and enlarged version. 

The attribution to Sansovino of the other 
smaller Mercury also gains in force now that 
Minerva is seen to have formed a pair with it. 
These two deities are not infrequently coupled in 
Renaissance art. I may cite Piero di Cosimo's 
picture of The Temple of Hercules in the Uffizi 
'Andromeda' series, where they occupy the two 
niches of the temple-front. As to the Stockholm 
Mercury, my feeling, so far as I could judge its 
form in the plaster cast, was that it lacked the 
definite Italian and cinquecento character of the 
smaller and earlier model. Its qualities, of another 
style, seemed to me to mark the gulf that separates 
even the cleverest imitator from the creator of a 
masterpiece. This divergence in the two inherent 
ideas can, perhaps, be more readily shown if we 
examine the strapping of the sandal about the 
ankle, which is the same in the two smaller Mer- 
curies and in the Minerva,hui different and less well 
considered, in the larger Stockholm Mercury. How 
securely the sandal is fastened in the first ; how 
finely the rich bow serves to decorate the under 
form and relieve its nakedness ! In the other, the 
sandal looks as if it must fall off with every step and 
the sparing bov/ come undone. When we reflect 
that the sandals and the helmet are the only orna- 
ments which any of these figures bear, we shall 
realise that the least strap or buckle can ill be 
spared, and how much these features count as 

Who may be the maker of this, the third, the 
larger, the solitary Stockholm Mercury, we do 
not know. There is a mysterious inscription: 
I.G.V.S.F., which still awaits interpretation, on 
the side face of the round base, behind the statue. 

Charles Loeser. 

We gladly publish the following letter which not 
only carries the weight of Dr. Valentiner's valuable 
opinion, but embodies replies covering the same 
ground which we have received from Mr. A. V. 
Jaccaci and Mr. F. J. Mather, the writer of the article 
alluded to. We carefully explained in our note to 
that article that the unfavourable impression which 
the Rembrandt made upon us was gathered from 
the photograph only. We recognize the possibility 
that this may belie the original painting, although 
our opinion was based upon general considerations 
of design and character. As regards the picture 
by Benson the greater part of the information 
given by Dr. Valentiner was in our minds when 
we cautioned our readers against accepting without 
demur the Persian Sibyl as an original work by 
Benson. Though but a second-rate artist at his 
best Ambrosius Benson is, as Dr. Valentiner 
justly shows, a painter worthy of careful con- 
sideration. — Eds., Burlington Magazine. 

To the Editors of The Burlington Magazine. 

Sirs, — In an editorial note to the article by 
Mr. Mather about the pictures in the Hoe 
collection, doubts are expressed upon the 
genuineness of the portrait of a girl by 
Rembrandt. The questioning of well-known 
pictures from the study of photographs, and 
not from that of the originals, seems to be 
most regrettable, and it is particularly so in the 
case of this especially charming example of the 
Master in the Hoe Collection which has been ap- 
proved by the three best experts on Rembrandt — 
Bode, Bredius and Hofstedc de Groot, who have 
seen it either in England or here. Indeed I do not 
believe that anyone who knows the original could 
possibly doubt it. The model is the same as in 
the Dulwich College Young Girl in a White Shirt 
Looking out of a IVindouj, for which a drawing 
by Rembrandt exists in the collection of Fried. 
Aug. II in Dresden. 

In regard to the Persian Sibyl in the same col- 
lection, I think the attribution to Ambrosius Benson 
perfectly right. This artist is not the master of 
the Half Figures, neither is he the rather misty 
person Mr. Mather believes him to be, at least he 
should not be so considered, since the Bruges ex- 
hibition made him generally known and the 
published studies of Hulin, Bodcnhausen and 
Friedlander have clearly defined and established 
his style and personality. Bodenhausen has a list 


Letters to the Editors 

of twenty of his works, Fricdlaiidcr knows no less 
Hum forty, and in his article, that about the por- 
traits by Benson (Jahrbuch der Konigl. Preiis. 
Kiinstsa'mml. 1910), he says, quite rightly, that the 
identification oi' the artist with the pictures now 
given him, and of which two are signed with the 
initials A. B., is more certain than the identification 
of the Adriaen Isenbrandt with theseries of pictures 
which are now acknowledged to be by Isenbrandt. 
It would be fortunate indeed, if all these early 
Flemish painters had as characteristic and easily 
recognisable a style as that of Benson, with the hard 
and broken folds of the draperies, the unusually 
long fingers and especially the curious mixture of 
Lombard and Spanish influences with the Nether- 
landish /o/Ji/, which is explained by the fact that 
he was born in Lombardy and had relations with 

The Hoe picture belonged to the Hainauer 
collection, and when exhibited at Bruges, Hulin 
and Friedliinder gave it to Benson. Bodenhausen 
gives it in his list of the works of the artist 
(No. 46 B) together with the so-called portrait of 
J acqucUnc of Bavaria in Antwerp, as replicas after 
the Deipaia Virgo in the same Museum. That this 
latter picture has nothing to do with Mostaert nor 
the female half figure in Antwerp with Jacqueline 
of Bavaria (whose coat of arms in that picture was 
painted later) is acknowledged in the official 
catalogue of the Antwerp Museum of 1905, This 
type of half figures of women has been often 
repeated by Benson or in his studio, but always 
in variants, that is with some differences in the 
attributes or in the position of the head and hands, 
or in the dress. The second work by Benson in 
the Hoe Collection is a variant of the Magdalen 
in the Martin le Roy collection. 

I may mention in this connexion two other 
pictures by Benson which have recently come to 
America, one a Pictd, from the Delassue Collection 
in Paris, and which figured in the Sedelmeyer sale 
of 1907 under the name of Gerard David. It is 
inspired by the David Pictd of which two replicas 
exist, one in Burgos, the other in the collection of 
Mr. Johnson in Philadelphia. The second picture, 
now in the Johnson Collection, is the triptych 
which Friedlander mentions as in the possession of 
Dr. Mersch. The kneeling St. Jerome in the centre 
panel is likewise imitated from a David original, 
the composition of which Isenbrandt also used for 
a painting with the identical subject now in the 
same Johnson collection. So that we can see in 

these two paintings what Benson and Isenbrandt 
who started from the same atelier, had in common. 
A picture by Benson which is not as yet known, 
and has some interest and importance for the 
history of genre painting, is in the Museum at 
Verona. It represents ladies and gentlemen at a 
dinner party out-doors ; the figures are half life 
size. — Yours truly, W. R. Vai.entiner. 

To the Editors of The Burlington Magazine. 
Gentlemen, — A letter from an Englishman, 
who signs himself ' a Venetian in heart,' to the 
' Gazzetta di Venezia,' has aroused the interest of 
the artistic world in Venice, on the state of the 
frescoes by Giambattista Tiepolo in the Labia 
Palace. For some time past certain ominous 
cracks in both the frescoes have attracted atten- 
tion, but it now transpires that the mischief is 
steadily increasing, and must be dealt with in- 
stantly if these treasures of art are to be saved. 
The fresco representing the Eiubarcation of 
Anionv and Cleopatra, is in the worse condition 
of the two ; large cracks running both along and 
across the painting, and spoiling to a distressing 
extent the figure of the Egyptian Queen. Dottore 
Lionello Venturi, State Inspector of the Venetian 
galleries, confirms the fears caused by this con- 
dition of things, and reports that ' the crack in 
this fresco has really increased of late and requires 
speedy restoration.' As to the damages existing 
in the other paintings— the Feast of Antony and 
Cleopatra, and the ceiling, Signor Venturi is of 
opinion that no immediate danger exists, although 
even in these the cracks are larger than they were, 
and the stucco that was used to fill them in does 
not now suffice to close them entirely. The 
Labia Palace in which these famous frescoes 
stand, was offered for sale in 1890 by the Jewish 
Congregation of Vienna to the Municipality of 
Venice for the modest sum of 50,000 francs 
(;^'2,ooo). This offer was, however, rejected, and 
the palace was then bought by a certain Signor 
Orreftice, who now pleads poverty as an excuse 
for not conforming to the Italian law, which 
exacts that owners of works of art should provide 
for their safe keeping. Now that public attention 
has been aroused it is to be hoped that a remedy 
may be found, and that prompt and efficient steps 
will be taken to protect and preserve these 
masterpieces. Alethea Wiel. 



The Problem of Form in Painting and Sculp- 
ture. By Adolf Hildebrand. Translated and 
revised with the author's co-operation by 
Max Meyer and Robert Morris Ogden. New 
York: G. E. Stechart and Co. 1910. 
There has, during the last two decades, probably 
not been published any other book on the Theory 
of Art which has had a deeper and sounder in- 
fluence on the scientific world on the Continent 
than the above-named book by the well-known 
German sculptor Adolf Hildebrand. Although 
exceptionally hard to read, owing to its lack of 
literary style, it has already appeared in five 
German editions and one French. The English 
translation, which has been prepared by two 
American university-professors, possesses the 
great advantage of being illustrated, although in a 
rather unsatisfactory way both in regard to the 
choice and to the quality of the illustrations. 
The translation being very good, it is a pity that 
more care has not been taken in the typographic 
appearance of the book. The very concentrated 
form in which the author's ideas are presented 
makes them hard to digest even for people who 
are fairly familiar with the subjects discussed, and 
therefore it would have been all the more desirable 
to have them elucidated by good and appropriate 
illustrations. Only by demonstrating how the 
ideas which Hildebrand puts forward have been 
applied in the classic art of various ages and how 
the violation of those principles has led to the 
decay of art, could they be made intelligible to a 
broader public and become a sort of basis for the 
understanding of plastic art. 

Space limits me to giving a few hints concerning 
the principal points in the author's treatment of 
his subject, beginning with some lines from his 
foreword to the third edition, which strike the 
note of the whole treatise. 

' Sculpture and painting, in contrast with archi- 
tecture, are usually looked upon as imitative arts. 
This classification, however, expresses merely their 
differences and does not take into consideration 
their resemblances. 

' Sculpture and painting are, indeed, imitative 
inasmuch as they are based on a kind of study of 
Nature. And this, in a way, ties down the artist, 
for it follows that the problems of form, with 
which he has to deal when imitating, emanate 
directly from his perception of Nature. But if 
these problems and no others be solved — i.e., if 
the artist's work claims attention merely on these 
grounds — it can never attain self-sufliciency apart 
from Natuie. To gain such self-sufficiency the 
artist must raise the imitative part of his work to a 
higher plane, and the method by which he accom- 
plishes this I should like to call the Architectonic 
Method. Of course, I do not here use the word 
archiiedonic in its ordinary special significance. 
As in a drama or a symphony, so here, our per- 
ception enables us to reali/.e a unity of form 

lacking in objects themselves as they appear in 
Nature. It is the quality essential to this realiza- 
tion which I wish to denote by the term architec- 

' The problems of form arising from this archi- 
tectonic structure, though they are not given us 
immediately and self-evidently, by Nature, are yet 
the true problems of arts. Material acquired 
through a direct study of Nature is, by the archi- 
tectonic process, transformed into an artistic 
unity. When we speak of the imitative aspect of 
art we are referring to material which has not yet 
been developed in this manner. Through archi- 
tectonic development, sculpture and painting 
emerge then, from the sphere of mere naturalism 
into the realm of true art.' 

The book is, broadly speaking, mainly devoted 
to the demonstration of how this architectonic 
quality is acquired in the artistic creation and how 
it influences the effect of the work. But in order 
to establish a psychological basis for this demon- 
stration the author begins with a dissection of the 
artist's inner mental process which, according to 
his own words, must be shown ad octilos if a true 
insight in the realm of Art is to be gained. 
However, it seems to me that this merely optical 
introduction tends to limit the following ideas 
because of its purely intellectual character without 
any reference to the emotional element in the 
artist's conception. 

The second chapter is a very good demonstration 
of the difference between Form and Appearance 
or actual and perceptual form. The actual form, 
by co-operating with other forms, resolves itself 
into visual relationships and values, and the idea 
of the object is transformed into ideas of values 
for vision, which are conveyed to us by the artist's 

The idea of space and its visual expression is 
then presented as the very central point on which 
the value of the artistic creation depends. 'The 
more emphatically the artist demonstrates in his 
picture the volume of space, and the more positive 
the spatial suggestions contained in its perception 
are, the more living and vivid is the illusion which 
the picture affords.' The primary thing which is 
thus required of every work of pictorial or 
sculptural art is defined as ' visual values of space': 
' those values of an object which issue only in 
purely spatial perceptions tending toward the 
general conception of a segment of space.' 

The following chapters on ' Ideas of plane and 
depth ' and ' The conception of relief ' are both 
most important as illustrations of some of the 
fundamental principles lying at the basis of classic 
art of all times. The author here shows that the 
third dimension consists entirely of movement 
into depth. In a picture or a sculpture 'all rela- 
tions of solids and differences of solid form are 
read off from front to back, while the total ap- 
pearance will, at some point in the picture, sooner 



or later, according to the position of the objects 
represented, offer resistance to this even pene- 
tration, and tiius define the several volumes 

The value of different methods of composition 
and of elements like colour and illumination, as 
essential means of producing spatial effect, is 
discussed in some paragraphs which, although 
containing many good suggestions, give evidence 
of the author's limitations as a sculptor. 

All that has been said in the previous chapters 
about spacial values, movement into depth and 
the like, leads up to a masterly definition of true 
relief conception — perhaps the most valuable part 
of the book from a practical standpoint. Let me 
quote a few lines as illustration of the author's 
mode of viewing this question. 

' The conception of relief defines the relation of 
two-dimensional impressions to three-dimensional. 
It gives us a specific way of viewing Nature, 
it is a mould in which the artist casts the form of 
Nature. In all ages this mode of perception has 
resulted from the artist's insight into the unchange- 
able laws of art. . . . Just as in two-dimensional 
space all directions are measured with respect to 
the vertical and horizontal and thus become easily 
comprehensible, so the single ideas of depth 
obtain definite values only when they appear in 
relation to a general unitary idea of depth. The 
harmonious effect of a picture depends on the 
artist's ability to represent every single value as a 
relative value in this general conception of relief. 
It is thus that his work attains a uniform standard 
measurement. The more clearly this is felt, the 
more unified and satisfactory is the impression. 
This unity is, indeed, the ' Problem of Form in Art,' 
and the value of a work of art is determined by 
the degree of such unity to which it attains. It 
is this unity which consecrates the representation 
of Nature.' 

In the two last chapters— ' Form as interpreta- 
tion of life' and ' Sculpture in stone' — the author 
proceeds to a closer consideration of the special 
problems connected with plastic art, its concep- 
tion and technique, and although the standpoint 
taken sometimes seems onesided, we always have, 
on reading these passages, the impression of being 
in companionship with a man who has a most 
thorough practical experience in the realm of 
sculpture and an unusual intellectual ability for 
giving reasons why a certain thing must be done 
in this way and not the other. 

When Hildebrand's ideas are put into a simpler 
and more comprehensible form, so that they might 
be understood and applied by everyone interested 
in art, they will certainly prove a great help to a 
higher standard of sculptural workmanship and 
general art-criticism than obtains at the present 


OsvALD Sir£n. 

Turner's Sketches and Drawings. By A. J. 
Finberg. With loo illustrations. London : 
Methuen. 12s. 6d. net. 
Mr. Finherg has a conspicuous advantage over 
all living students of Turner, not excepting the 
two or three who arc rightly regarded as authorities 
on certain aspects of his work. While making 
his inventory of the myriad sketches and studies 
bequeathed by Turner to the nation, he was 
brought of necessity into close contact with 
documents from which either the professional 
biographer or the natural gossip could have 
reaped a rich literary harvest. Mr. Finberg, at all 
events for the time being, has turned his back 
upon these obvious allurements, and devoted 
himself to a careful study of the relation which 
the sketches bear to the finished works which 
Turner founded upon them. 

Many years ago, less boldly, less precisely, 
and with far less wealth of sufficient and convinc- 
ing illustration, Hamerton put forward much the 
same explanation as Mr. Finberg does now of 
Turner's attitude towards nature and art. But his 
argument never succeeded in converting either a 
public enchanted by the eloquence of Kuskin or 
the professional artists whose approval was 
best worth having. Hamerton wrote at a time 
when a new reaction against traditional methods 
of work was beginning, and his modest and rather 
monotonous voice was drowned in the ensuing 
tumult. In France the Impressionists discovered 
Realism in Turner, though in a different way from 
Ruskin, and the discovery has become a super- 
stition with the schools of painting elsewhere 
which have founded themselves, in part at least, 
upon the Impressionist example. 

So much of history is needed to explain a certain 
subdued militance which underlies Mr. Finberg's 
carefully tempered phrases. From the very first 
he sets himself to demolish the realistic heresy, 
and by the relentless opposition of sketch to 
finished picture he proves convincingly that Turner, 
from childhood to old age, had none of that 'sin- 
cerity ' which has become a shibboleth, even with 
painters from whom a more tolerant outlook might 
reasonably have been hoped. The wonderful draw- 
ings made on the Italian tour of 1819-20 have 
indeed 'sincerity ' in the modern art-school sense, 
though they are for the most part merely pencil 
outlines ; yet it is significant that Turner painted 
few pictures from them, and these are by no means 
among his best works. His masterpieces were 
built up in his studio from much slighter memo- 
randa : sufficient indeed to recall to Turner the 
emotional mood which occasioned their making, 
but often so deficient in their statement of the 
material aspect of things as to render the sub- 
sequent painting an act of pure imaginative 
invention from first to last. To this, no 
doubt, Turner's paintings owe their singular 



internal coherence, as they owe to his amazing 
memory their reputation for realism. In this 
connexion we may mention one point upon 
which Mr. Finberg only touches incidentally : 
namely the figures in Turner's pictures. Now 
without the evidence of all Turner's sketch books 
it is difficult to speak positively, but it seems as 
if these hundreds of thousands of human beings 
and animals in every variety of occupation and 
pose are represented even less adequately by 
studies than the landscapes they so busily people. 
Granted that the figures are often carelessly 
painted and queerly built : can we deny on the 
other hand their liveliness, their appropriateness to 
different climates, moods and technical condi- 
tions? And they are evolved from tiny pencil 
hieroglyphs, brief written memoranda such as 
' Children at tub, a girl beating the barrel, etc.,' or 
in the vast majority of cases from Turner's 
brain alone. Mr. Finberg notes with considerable 
point how this interest in humanity failed with the 
painter's failing health, and that while his mastery 
of tone and colour endured to the end, his art 
became steadily dehumanized. Hence his later 
studies owe as much of their fascination to their 
remoteness from mankind as his early works owe 
to their sympathy with men's joys and sorrows 
and labour. 

Being in substantial agreement with Mr. 
Finberg's views both of Turner and of the general 
aesthetic questions discussed in the concluding 
chapter, I can find no worse faults than a misprint 
in the titles of plates 78 and 80, which is repeated 
in the text of the work, and the inclusion of 
certain not very interesting outline studies to 
which no reference seems to be made. Possibly 
the author curtailed his matter after choosing 
his illustrations ? 

The book will be of the greatest interest to all 
students of Turner ; but it should also be of the 
greatest use to any practical painter who takes his 
art seriously. The mere comparison of the two 
sketches of Whalley Bridge— the charming elabo- 
rate one which Turner did not use, and the much 
simpler one which he made the foundation of a 
noble picture — would be the most vivid of lessons 
as to what is material for a great artist and what 
is not. C. J. H. 

Denkmaeler der Kunst in Dalmatien. 

Herausgegeben von Georg Kowalczy, n it 

einer einleilung von Cornelius Gurlitt. Berli n : 

Verlag fur Kunstwissenschaft. 2 portfolios. 

125 marks. 

These two atlases of large collotype reproductions 

of the monuments of Dalmatia form invaluable 

records of an art which is even now less studied 

than it deserves. The full importance of the art 

which grew up on the eastern shores of the Adriatic 

in the earlier centuries of the Christian era is indeed 

only beginning to be realized. The palace of Dio- 
cletian at Spalato has, it is true, always been recog- 
nized as a monument of critical importance in the 
history of architecture, and the illustrations of this 
given by Herr Kowalczy are the most complete 
ever made. They are supplemented by repro- 
ductions of Adam's engravings. The comparison 
of the photographs with these is extremely instruc- 
tive. It shows that Adam, with his preconceptions 
of Classical correctness, missed the whole point of 
the art of Diocletian's time. He has frozen the 
forms into a mechanical rigidity, trying to correct 
what were for him regrettable solecisms. We are 
only just now beginning to perceive that this so- 
called decadence of Hellenistic art was already 
in the third century instinct with the promise of 
new life. That the Syrian artists whom Diocletian 
employed were already feeling their way to some- 
thing infinitely richer and more expressive than 
the idiom which they were mispronouncing. It 
is because we can trace here one of the earliest 
expressions of the great new ideas upon which 
the whole subsequent art of Europe was based 
that these buildings, with their romantic mis- 
understanding of Roman forms, are so supremely 
interesting. The changes of forms are as yet very 
slight, the change of spirit is unmistakable. 

Besides the palace at Spalato, these volumes 
contain reproductions of the remains at Salona 
near by, which are important for the subsequent 
development of early Christian art. The second 
volume gives the more important remains at Zara, 
Arbe, Sebenico and Trau, and finally the examplesof 
the Venetian renaissance at Ragusa are thoroughly 

The preface to these admirable reproductions 
is written by Dr. Cornelius von Gurlitt, and is of 
absorbing interest. He brings to bear upon the 
questions of art-history a wide knowledge of the 
political and religious conditions of the Roman 
Empire in a manner only too rare among art- 
historians. The whole publication deserves the 
highest praise. 

The Story of Dutch Painting. By Charles 
H. Caffin. London : T. Fisher Unwin. 1910. 
4s. 6d. net. 
In these days when it has become the fashion for 
historians of art to dwell on the technical side of 
painting, and on the skill of the artist rather than 
the meaning of the work of art produced, it is 
refreshing to find a writer like Mr. Caffin treating 
of Dutch Painting from quite a different point of 
view. Mr. Caffin takes as a text, and a very good 
one, a well-known saying by Richard Wagner that 
all great art is produced in response to a common 
and collective need on the part of the community. 
From this starting-point Mr. Caffin reviews the 
history of Dutch painting during the seventeenth 
century as the natural outcome of the coming into 


Rev i erf s 

existence of a new nation— a nation, as Mr. Caffin 
says, concentrated upon its own self-reliance. Mr. 
Caffin sketches rapidly and lucidly the events 
which preceded and led up to the birth of a new 
art in In this he is able to rely upon the 
well-known works of his fellow-citizen, Mr. j. L. 
Motley. Mr. Caftin points out how the repudiation 
of the' Roman Catholic Church and the ceremonies 
of a regal court limited the artists of Holland to 
subjects drawn from their own life, and led them to 
concentrate themselves on their ^citrc, their land- 
scape, their cattle, and, above all, their portraits. 

Mr. Caffin points out that with the exception of 
Frans flals and two or three others, who were 
born before the actual beginning of the seventeenth 
centurv, all the great masters in Dutch painting 
were born during the first half of that century. 
This period was also that of Holland's rise to 
supremacy among the nations, its period of 
original independence and commercial activity, 
before, as Mr. Caffin truly says, it became a focus 
point of intrigue, involved in complications with 
France, Germany, and England. 

This historical" narrative leads Mr. Caffin to some 
interesting studies of the great Dutch painters, 
Hals, Hembrandt, Vermeer, Hobbema, and espe- 
cially Ruisdael. We can recommend these studies 
to our readers as worthy of their attention. If Mr. 
Caffin shows perhaps too obvious a familiarity with 
the writings of Eugene Fromenlin and Wilhelm 
Bode, he has still something original to say in 
most cases. Mr. Caftin's book is a welcome ex- 
ample of serious and intelligent criticism of art, 
which we are glad to be able to associate with the 
United States. L- C. 

QuiNTi HOI^ATI Flacci Opera omnia cura E. C. 
Wickham apud P. H. Lee Warner Mediceae 
Societatis Librarium Londini MDCCCCX. 
Boards, i6s. net ; limp velhim, £i 5s. net. 
This is the third of the finely produced volumes 
in course of issue under the superintendence of 
Mr. P. L. Warner, director of the Medici Society, 
their craftsmanship being due to Mr. jacobi at the 
Chiswick Press. As is well known, the type is 
designed by no lesser master of the fine arts than 
Mr. Herbert Home, to whom The Burlington 
Magazine itself owes a similar distinction. Mr. 
Home has told us that his design is based on 
the model of the Miscomino 'Horace' of 1492, 
but a comparison of the two types shows that he 
has scrupulously re-drawn every character. Mr. 
Home himself is one of the main examples 
which strengthen the disputable statement that 
genius means the transcendent capacity for taking 
trouble, but those who have not watched an artist 
designing characters are quite unconscious of the 
protracted labour, the foresight, and the judgment 
in balancing similarity with contrast, needed to 
produce such type as Mr. Home's. One of its 


chief char.acteristics is the care with which the 
direction of the serifs is calculated in order that 
they may form both barriers and links between 
the characters. While the base serifs are all 
rectangular the upper are curved at a lesser 
angle. There are three exceptions. Though 
it is evident that 'v' and 'x' necessitate 
liorizontal upper serifs, it is difficult to follow the 
logic which requires those of 'u' to be horizontal 
and allows that of 'm' to be curved. No doubt 
Mr. Home's practice is founded on a subtle cal- 
culation of effects, which is hidden from us. Mr. 
Home has re-written Horace's name in an endur- 
ing metal, but in spite of our own advantage we 
cannot but grudge the time which this minute 
labour has diverted from his artistic expression in 
more important fields— from the scholarly lyrics, 
the terse and limpid prose, the delicate drawings 
and the fine architectural designs of past years ; 
and latterly from his own acs peremiis, the 
completion of his great work on Botticelli. 

A Medieval Garner. By G. G. Coulton. 

With 46 Illustrations. Constable and Co. 

21S. net. 
Mr. Coulton is a diligent and experienced 
student of mediaeval detail. Hitherto, precon- 
ceived principles incompatible with the spirit of 
mediaevalism have hindered him in forming any 
very trustworthy general estimate of the middle 
ages. But a broad view is not within the scope of 
a miscellaneous collection such as 'A Medieval 
Garner,' and Mr. Coulton is at his best in present- 
ing isolated scenes. He seems to have collected 
passages, in the course of his wide reading in 
mediaeval writings, which struck him as generally 
entertaining. If his book were read continuously 
its disconnected variety might well weary the 
reader ; its scenes are to be glanced at occasionally 
and should thus prove instructive and agreeable. 
Mr. Coulton seems himself to have translated most, 
if not all, of the passages ; at any rate, his versions 
possess the first requisite of translation, for they 
are so plausible and pleasant to read that they 
disincline the critic from testing their accuracy. 
The choice of extracts is comprehensive as to time, 
place, and subject ; we cannot do sufficient justice 
to them here, for we are only concerned with those 
which illustrate the art of the period. With this 
view we should have welcomed more and longer 
extracts from Theophilus's Treatise on Painting, 
Enamelling, Goldsmith's Work, Modelling, etc. 
Particularly interesting is the extract from the 
Chronicon de Melsa, already well-known to 
antiquaries, concerning the crucifix belonging to 
that abbey (Meaux, in Yorkshire). The chronicler 
relates that the crucifix, which was so impressive 
as to become an object of popular veneration, was 
carved within the abbey from the life. He 
apparently notes this circumsance as if it were 


unusual, and we believe that this is one of the 
earliest references (1339-1349) to modelling from 
the nude in England. The list of ecclesiastical 
furniture, in the Register of the Visitation of York 
Minster in 15 19 is also noteworthy. Mr. Coulton 
has chosen many interestmg illustrations from illu- 
minated MSS. New reproductions are not to be 
demanded in a work of this kind, but those repeated 
were not very accessible to Mr. Coulton's readers, 
and they increase the attractions of this book. His 
Glossary is not efficient. The definition of a 
chasuble as 'an ecclesiastical outer garment,' and 
of a dalmatic as ' a wide gown, used by the clergy,' 
does not convey much useful information, nor 
imply certainty in the writer's mind concerning the 
use of those vestments. 

HisToiRE DE l'Imagerie Populaire Flamande 
ET des ses Rapports avec les Imageries 
Etrangeres. Par Emile Van Heurck et G. 
J. Boekenoogen. Brussels: Van Oest et Cie. 

The graphic arts are among the most elementary 
forms of human expression, and divided early into 
two great branches, one literary, the other pictorial. 
Just as children can express their ideas often 
more readily by drawing than by writing, so does 
the popular mind find it sometimes easier to express 
its feelings pictorially. It is really from such 
beginnings that the arts of painting and engraving 
have been developed. Given the requisite materials 
and pigments, method will express itself pictorially. 
Some of its efforts will be rude and untutored, but 
by degrees the march of intellect will refine these 
pictorial efforts, and subject them to certain rules 
and theories of colours and draughtsmanship. 
Hence arises a cleavage of levels. The artist's mind 
continues to work pictorially in an ever-ascending 
degree, while the popular mind is content to re- 
main much on the same level as before. Taking 
the Fine Arts as a whole, it is therefore rather low 
that we must descend before we arrive at popular 
imagery, the 'penny plain and tuppence coloured' 
branch of the pictorial arts. When, however, we 
do so descend, we are surprised to learn how much 
the heart of a nation can be discerned beating 
under these ephemeral and apparently worthless 
efforts in art. Every country has its own popular 
imagery. The book before us deals with one local 
branch of it, during the nineteenth century, which 
at first sight seems hardly worthy of so important 
and bulky a commemorative volume. The com- 
pilation will however be of interest to students of 
modern Flemish art and history. The book is very 
well printed and copiously illustrated. The 
accounts, however, of popular imagery in other 
countries — e.g., in England — appear to be some- 
what inadequate, although the authors have been 
very painstaking. L. C. 

Charterhouse Old and New. Four Original 

Etchings by D. Y. Cameron, A.R.S.A., etc. 

Letterpress by E.P. Eardley Wilmot and E.^C. 

Streatfield. Eneas Mackay. 
A ' Biographical Note,' which we should other- 
wise have described as a bibliographical one, 
tells us that this portfolio is composed of ' letter- 
press' abridged from a book of the same title, 
published some five years ago, accompanying 
' impressions,' printed from Mr. Cameron's 'copper- 
plates especially revised' by him 'for this issue.' 
It therefore requires little renewed comments ; 
the text will be as interesting to Old Carthusians 
and to those other readers who are attracted, 
as they were before, by London antiquities, and 
we may assume that Mr. Cameron's revision of 
his plates is improvement, without comparing 
the two states. The most salient new merit of the 
work is its form. It is well printed on large paper 
allowing for wide margins, enclosed in a simple 
portfolio covered with white vellum-paper, which 
is itself enclosed within two neat card-board cases. 
It may thus serve as a model for publications of 
works of its class, and the publishers deserve 
credit for having contrived to give the work so 
' precious ' an appearance. 
The Book of Decor.'\tive Furniture. By 

Edwin Foley. London and Edinburgh : T. C. 

and E. C. Jack. 2s. 6d. net each part. 
We have before us Sections I, II, III and IV of a 
new publication by Messrs. Jack, this time a history 
of Decorative Furniture, a subject much before the 
public eye at the present date. The work is to be 
completed in seventeen sections, and to contain 
100 plates in colour. We gather from the pro- 
spectus that one of the objects before the publishers 
is to present the subject in a lucid, informed, and 
comprehensive manner, aided by features hitherto 
unattempted. What these features may turn out 
to be is not at once evident, but the author, Mr. 
Edwin Foley, is determined to be comprehensive, 
as he begins with Mother Earth, and proposes to 
continue with the nineteenth — though why not 
the twentieth ? — century. The first numbers denote 
a publication which should reach an extensive 
public. The colour plates in Section I include 
the famous Faversham Chest, an Italian Cassone 
from the Victoria and Albert Museum, a Gothic 
Sclirank from Munich, and an oak double hutch 
belonging to Mr. Guy Laking. In Section II we 
have the Offley Muniment Chest from St. Saviour's, 
Southvvark, the Court Cupboard from Oxburgh 
Hall, the Oak Chest in the Strangers' Hall at 
Norwich, and the panelled room at Groombridge 
Place. Sections III and IV also contain some inte- 
resting pieces, but the colour-plates in Section IV 
are very crude in tone. Those in the earlier sec- 
tions are better. Some useful tabular statements 
of dates and periods are also added to assist the 
student. L. C. 



Quaint Old English Tottery. By Cliarlcs I. 

Lomax, with a pref.icc by M. L. Solon. 

Shcrratt and Hughes, London and Man- 

cliestcr : £2 2s. net. 
Collectors and students of EngHsh Pottery will 
welcome Mr. Loma.\'s book, as it contains much 
information on the subject, gathered together 
from many sources, and forms a valuable addition 
to the literature on this interesting branch of native 
art. The author writes with authority, his descrip- 
tions of forms and colours are clear and precise, 
and show not only that he is familiar with the sub- 
ject, but that he has studied it from all points of 
view and has it very much at heart. The forms 
and peculiarities of Wrotham, Ticknall, Farnham, 
Staffordshire, Derbyshire, Somersetshire and other 
early wares are discussed at length, remarkable 
specimens in private collections and museums are 
minutely described, and in many cases illustrations 
of the most interesting examples are given. The 
author seems, however, to have overlooked the 
curious examples of seventeenth-century work at 
Old Basing House, where there are some garden 
flower-vases and stands made of fine red clay. 
They bear the arms of the Paulet family sur- 
rounded by foliage and birds, the design being 
deeply incised and filled up with white clay in 
the manner of the early encaustic tiles. Owing 
to their being unglazed, time and exposure to the 
weather have reduced the white filling to the 
softness of hearthstone. They are, however, uncom- 
mon examples of the potter's art and quite worth 
inspection. Mr. Lomax is to be congratulated 
on being the possessor of so many fine specimens, 
doubtless the result of untiring watchfulness quite 
as much as of judicious expenditure. At the 
beginning of the book is a portrait of the author, 
at least we presume so, for though no name is 
given, the subject of the portrait holds a dish, which 
is illustrated later in the work as his property. 
The numerous illustrations, both those in colour 
and in black-and-white, are worthy of all praise. 
The book also contains a valuable list of 
' Examples of Slip-decorated Pottery with names, 
dates and inscriptions,' and a good index, which 
makes us excuse such little slips in the text as 
'either* for 'either,' 'crust' for 'cruet' and 'fig. 
LXVir for 'fig. LXVI,' etc. Collectors may 
be interested to know that a selection of pieces 
from Dr. Glaisher's collection of Pottery, so often 
mentioned in this work, have recently been 
deposited in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, 
where it is to be hoped they may eventually find a 
permanent resting-place. C. L. 

Le Portrait en France. ParL. Dumont-Wilden. 
Brussels : G. Van Oest et Cie. 
This volume is an interesting contribution to the 
study of iconography, for in dealing with the 
French portrait-painters of the eighteenth century, 


the author, M. Dumont-Wilden, does more than 
give a mere catalogue of their works and an 
account of their lives. The latter, indeed, he rele- 
gates with courage to an appendix. He seeks 
rather to illustrate and analyse the art of portraiture 
— as exemplified in the widely different art of 
painters like Rigaud, La Tour, Chardin, and Mme. 
Vigee-Lebrun. The interest in this fascinating 
study seems to have its origin in a visit to the little 
museum at St. Quentin, where is stored that mar- 
vellous collection of pastels and portrait studies by 
Maurice Quentin de La Tour. Few persons, who 
have taken the trouble to go to St. Quentin, can 
have helped being deeply moved and interested by 
these drawings by La Tour, in which the whole 
secret of portraiture seems to be set forth and 
expounded. There may have been greater portrait- 
painters than La Tour, but in his own line he 
remains unsurpassed, even by Perronneau, who 
leapt into fame during recent exhibitions in Paris, 
or by the facile and accomplished grace of Rosalba 
Carriera, or the mannered excellence of J. E, 
Liotard. M. Dumont-Wilden has many interesting 
things to say about Rigaud, Largilliere, A. Pesne, 
Raoux and other French painters of this period, 
which is now beginning to receive the attention 
that it deserves. Some of the illustrations have 
rather failed in the printing, or else are founded on 
inadequate negatives. The reproduction of La 
Tour's pastels are perhaps the most successful. 

Traditional Methods of Pattern Designing. 
By A. H. Christie. Clarendon Press. 6s. net. 
Mr. Christie's book deserves praise within its 
proper limits, which admit much industry and 
exclude any very searching light upon his subject. 
He has collected a great many examples of orna- 
ment from a great variety of sources. These do 
not appeal strongly to the eye, for an important 
section of them, the purely geometrical patterns, 
lose their beauty when they are exhibited without 
perspective and in the violent contrast of untoned 
black and white, conditions to which they are 
never subjected in actual use. Their classification 
does not lead to any very important result, and 
their numbers leave Mr. Christie little room for 
the development of theory. Though he suggests 
to students the habit of seeing the basis of orna- 
ment through the incidents which may vary it 
indefinitely, he does not point out clearly enough 
that in all but the simplest geometrical patterns 
the basis depends on the manner of regarding 
them — that there are frequently several alternative 
bases. Ornament has only one function per sc, 
decoration. 'Informative' signs only become 
ornament when they produce a beautiful effect, 
and the pomegranate is equally ornamental 
whether it denotes the Moorish expulsion from 
Spain, or Katharine of Aragon, or tfie inviolability 
of marriage, or purely a fruit. It is a pity that 
Mr. Christie did not give himself more space for 


theorizing, since he seems inclined to it. He just 
starts the inquiry, why among many patterns 
seemingly equally spontaneous in distant localities 
a few should be entirely confined to one locality. 
His book would have been more interesting if he 
had pursued these inquiries. 

The Antiquary's Books. The Parish Registers 
of England. By J. Charles Cox, LL.D., 
F.S.A. London : Methuen and Co., Limited. 
7s. 6d. net. 

At first sight parish registers do not appear to have 

any connexion with the fine arts. Many students, 
however, who may be engaged on biographies of 
artists, especially local artists outside the central 
world of London, will be glad to have a book 
which will help them to trace the lives of English 
artists, and which will also explain some of the 
different forms and customs and other peculiarities 
which are given from time to time in Parish 
Registers. Dr. Cox is an antiquary of long- 
standing repute and he tells us that this work is the 
result of fifty years' study. 




Allen (A. M.). A history of Verona. (9x5) London (Methuen), 
I2S. 6(1. net. Illustrations. 

HouDARD (G.). Les chateaux royaux de Saint-Germain-en- 
Laye, 1 124-1789, Vol. I. (11x9) Saint-Germain-en-Laye 
(Rivault), 25 fr. To be completed in about 3 vols. Illus- 

Delahache (G.). La cathedcale de Strasbourg. (8x5) Paris 
(Longuet), 5 fr. Illustrated. 

Hager (G.) and Lill (G.). Die Kunstdenkmiiler des Konig- 
reichs Bayern : Bezirksant Sulzbach ; Bezirksant Regens- 
burg. (10x7) Munich (Oldenbourg), 6 M. and 9 M. 

Davey (R,). The Tower of London. (9 X 6) London (Methuen), 
los. Od. net. Illustrations. 

Lucas (P.). Heathfield memorials, collected from the parish 
records and other unpublished manuscripts. (10x7) 
London (Humphreys), 21s. net. Pp. 104-108 are upon 
' Jonathan Harmer and his pottery.' Illustrated. 

Geiger (B.). Maffeo Verona (1574-1618) und seine Werke fiir 

die Markuskirche zu Venedig. (9x6) Berlin (Thesis for the 

Ph.D. of the Friedrich-Wilhelms University). 132 pp. 
RoSEROt (A.). Edme Bouchardon. (12x8) Paris (Lib. cenlrale 

des Beaux-Arts), 25 fr. Plates. 
Marie (A). Un imagier romantique : Celestin Nanteuil, 

peintre, aquafortiste et lithographe, suivi d'un etude biblio- 

graphique et d'un catalogue, (11x8) Paris (Carteret). 

JOETS (J.). L'ecole des Beaux-Arts de Saint-Omer (1767-1908). 

Notices sur F. Chifflart, A. de Neuville, Belly, Louis-Noel, 

Lormier A. Bertram. (11x9) Saint Omer (Memorial 

Hartmann (H.). Joham Conrad Schlaun, sein Leben und 

seine BautStigkeit mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung des 

* Sizes (height X width) in inches. 

koniglichen Schlosses zu Miinster i. W. (12 x 8) Miinster 
(Coppenrath). Plates. 

HUSSELL (A. T.), North Devon churches: studies of some of 

the ancient buildings. (11x9) Barnstaple (the 'Herald' 

Press), I2s. 6d. net. 130 pp., illustrated. 
Records of eighteenth-century domestic architecture and 

decoration in Dublin. Vol. II. (12X9) Dublin (University 

Press, for the Georgian Society), 21s. rij plates. 
PiNDER (W.). Deutscher Dome des Mittelalters. (10x7) 

Dusseldorf and Leipzig (Langewissche), i M. 80. 96 plates. 
ScHEERER (F.). Kirchen und Kloster der Franziskaner und 

Dominikaner in Thuringen. (9x6) Jena (Fischer) ; thesis 

for Doctorate in Engineering. 148 pp., illustrated, 

HoFSTEDE DE Groot (C). A Catalogue raisonnfe of the works 

of the most eminent Dutch painters of the seventeenth 

century, based on the work of John Smith. Vol. III. 

Hals, I. and F. van Ostade, A. Brouwer. (10x6) London 

(Macmillan), 25s. net. 
R6au (L.). Les primitifs allemands ; etude critique. (9x6) 

Paris (Laurens), 3 fr. 24 plates. 
Jakel (M.). Zur Koraposition des Hans Memling. Kin 

Erganzungskapitel zu Lessings L.aokoon. (9x6) Leipzig 

(Thesis for Ph.D.). 94 pp. 
Schulze(H.). Angelo Bronzinos Werke. (11x8) Strassburg 

(Heitz); thesis for Ph.D., Heidelberg, 1909. 48 pp. 


Bieber (M.). Das Dresdener Schauspielrelief. Ein Beitrag 
zur Geschichte des tragischen Costiims und der griechischen 
Kunst. (10x7) Bonn (Cohen), 3 M. 50. 90 pp., illustrated. 

SUPINO (J. B.). La scultura in Bologna nel sec. XV ; ricerCiC 
e studi. (10x7) Bologna (Zanichelli), 15 1. Phototypes. 

SirEn (O ). Studier i Florentinsk Renassans-Skulptur, och 
andra Konsthistoriska amnen. (10x8) Stockholm (VV.ihl- 
strom and Widstrand), 1909 ; 15 kr. Illustrated. 


Exhibitions on the scale and of the quality that 
obtain at the ' Lehrter Bahnhof in Berlin would 
be more monotonous than they already are if the 
committee should ever rest satisfied with simply 
presenting to its visitors a selection from the annual 
produce, and did not strive each year to keep up the 
interest in their enterprise by introducing special 
' side-shows.' However, even the number of these 
specialties seems to be nearly exhausted, and in the 
present year it may be doubted whether the few 
which have been introduced go far towards in- 

creasing the attractiveness of the big exhibition. 
The most acceptable thing in the line of 'extras' 
has always been the one-man show. But when it 
comes down to arranging one-man shows of such 
obviously unimportant men as those to whom this 
distinction has been granted in the present instance, 
it appears that even this ' special attraction ' has 
been drawn upon too long. The only good one- 
man show of this year is that of the comic 
cartoonist Jiittner. Jiittner has been connected 
for years with the ' Kladderadatsch' — that doyen 
and facile princeps of German comic papers — 


Art in Germany 

and lias contributed to others as occasion offered. 
What strikes one most in tiiis hirge show of 
liis work, beyond his humorous vein and 
powers of draut^htsmanship, is his great versatihty. 
He does not belong to the kind of artists who hit 
upon one funny notion, one peculiar knack of 
drawing, and abide by it for the rest of their lives. 
There is also a nice selection of the work of that 
poetic and delicate painter Rippl-Ronai. But 
this forms part of the Hungarian section, which is 
one of the signal features of this year's Lehrter 
Rahnhof exhibition. The black-and-white sec- 
tion is also important. It embraces four very 
good examples of the work of Marius Bauer, Louis 
Legrand, Auguste Lepere and H. Herkomer, and 
there is much very promising black-and-white 
by new men, among whom I note W. A. Meyer, 
W. Thielmann, E. Wolfsfeld and Coschell. Con- 
scious t)f the fact that much of the work contributed 
to such an exhibition is ephemeral and that it 
might be of interest to place amongst it some 
productions of a lasting, monumental character, 
the committee has devoted one room to large 
cartoons for mural paintings. Puvis de Chavannes, 
with some of his cartoons for the Pantheon St. 
Genevieve series, is the centre of interest. For 
modern men the committee had recourse to two 
foreigners, E. R. Menard and G. Picard. They 
cannot be considered to hold their ground by the 
side of Puvis; but one German, Hans Looschen, 
can hardly be said to be in the race at all. 

Nothing in German art has been more disap- 
pointing than the turn which the Berlin Secession 
exhibitions have taken of late. Ten years ago, at 
the date of its foundation, the Berlin Secession 
was a society of innovators or reformers, who 
stood up against frigid academic tradition and 
hampering of liberal development. It was natural 
that they should have aimed beyond their mark 
for fear of not reaching it, and that they should at 
first have acted rather wildly lest any milder sort 
of opposition should fall short of carrying the day. 
But the point has been forced, the battle has been 
won, and even the camp from which the Secession 
has seceded has by this time been thoroughly 
modernized. Of what use is it then to continue 
flaunting the old flag in the public face ? Why does 
the Secession, once a group of reformers and 
progressives, fail to be up to date, and why does it 
abide rather by the standpoint, which, if any, had 
but a temporary value ? The work which overleapt 
the barriers ten years ago, was interesting because 
of its powers to prove old, cut-and-dried rules fal- 
lacious, and also because of its bearing a promise 
of new and better rules. This promise has not 
been fulfilled : the Secession has not clarified its 
method, has not crystallized a new ideal. It has 
only succeeded in pulling down, not in setting up. 
The members of the Berlin Secession eschew taste. 
In fact it is plainly apparent that the members exer- 


cise a bad influence upon one another, and it is 
distressing to lind even such painters as Count 
Kidckreuth, Ulrich Hiibner, Robert Haug, Dora 
Hitz visibly coarsening their methods. In such a 
milieu even the aggressive realism of Anders Zorn 
seemed distinguished, and the simple paintings of 
Tlioma monumental, while Manet's ILxccidion oj 
Maxiiiiiliaii, lent by the Museum at Mannheim, 
was distinctly the clou of the exhibition. There 
were also two one-man shows: Habermann of 
Munich, the mannerist, and Wilhelm Triibner, who 
showed up well as always, although the selection 
had not been made carefully. 

Besides a moderate number of excellent canvases 
— a series of interiors by ileinrich Hiibner were 
the best — this year's Berlin Secession contains a 
large amount of graceless, unprepossessing work, 
and even some that was distinctly commonplace. 
There was not much sculpture exhibited, but most 
of that was good, either by virtue of its technique — 
the piquant touch of the sketch being preserved in 
the finished statue — or by a display of a broad and 
simple style of modelling. 

The Deutsch Kiinstlerbund split upitsexhibitions 
into two sections, painting and sculpture at Darm- 
stadt, black-and-white at Hamburg. In both places 
the jury had been decidedly too lenient, especially 
at Darmstadt. It is unmistakeable that the stan- 
dard of German Art exhibitions is somewhat lower 
than usual this year. This no doubt is the conse- 
quence of the steady increase of such shows. 
Besides the eight already mentioned there were 
more or less important ones held this summer at 
Baden-Baden, Weimar and Leipsic, not to men- 
tion ail the Kunstvereine and minor exhibitions, 
which in the aggregate, however, require thousands 
of pictures too. The art-workers of Germany, 
numerous as they are, are not sufficient to meet 
this enormous demand with really good work. 
Much is exhibited nowadays, even by well-known 
artists, which had better never have left the 

The latest show to open this season was the 
one at Dresden. It is ill housed in the exhibition 
galleries of the Fine Arts Academy, but no other 
place was available. It has been arranged by a 
new artists' society which has grown out of a sort 
of art-workers' guild in Dresden. There was 
nothing to secede from, so it could not adopt the 
title of ' Dresden Secession '; but the character of 
the society is similar to that of the ' Secessionists' 
in other cities. This, their first show, gives an 
idea of there being a good deal of fair talent at 
work in Dresden, though commanding geniuses 
are not conspicuous. Two large rooms have been 
allotted to guests, principally from Berlin and 
Munich. But here, too, the jury has played its 
part too leniently, and much has been admitted, 
which does not properly deserve the designation 
of fine art at all. H. W. S. 

liAPHNEl'H' ||:i i^ ^UKTAII.) 



of comm> 

tion as u.l O' 
become tlv 

>quirc as much alteii- 
bibited, so that it has 
i- . i-l' exhibitir'n^. 
., for a; 
i(i display ■ 

m among the ownr 
>rks of art, and especially those who 

so often for their 
■ ^..■...^, ,....,.v, ... ^•■'•■■- *-o participate 
the luxury of the .is. Special 

precautions had, however, been taken at 
Brussels to house t,he loan collections of 
works of art, as such, in a separate building, 
where the risk of damage was practically 
non-existent. Deeply as we must all regret 
the loss of treasures in the British anil 

' ^els, it must be 


.,L iroyed, 
ere cash. Di 

re is bein;. ire that the 

• the i iiic Arts E. ' ' '1 

in a separate iMnanig 

itish supervision, provided 

rolled by the Exhibitions Branch 






HE object of an Inter- 
national Exhibition and 
of the participators there- 
in may be said to be of a 
dual nature — to illustrate 
and proclaim the com- 
mercial and artistic progress of a nation 
and to prepare the ground for an extension 
and acceleration of such progress in the 
future. In such exhibitions commercial 
interests naturally take the first place, but 
experience has shown that commerce can 
seldom make any great progress without 
the friendly assistance of the Fine Arts. 
Hence the Fine Arts have come to take 
their place among the commercial assets 
of a nation, while artists and craftsmen 
have learnt in their turn the useful lesson, 
that the mere act of exhibition does not 
of itself conduce to success. The example 
of commerce has taught them that the 
methods of display require as much atten- 
tion as the objects exhibited, so that it has 
become the practice at such exhibitions, 
sometimes with striking success, for artists 
to combine their efforts and display their 
wares in organized methods which illus- 
trate in themselves the trend of artistic 
thought and expression in any particular 

The danger in this arises from the 
facility with which the true aesthetic ideas 
of art may be submerged or overgrown 
by the hardy weeds of the advertiser and 
the bagman, a danger only too obvious at 
the most recent International Exhibitions. 
A work of art is in itself a separate creation, 
born of the imagination and brought into 
existence by the skill of an individual 
artist. A work of art, whatever its merits 
may be, is a distinct and precious entity, 
irreplaceable when destroyed, and not to 
be estimated in mere cash. Directly, how. 

The Burlington Magazime, No. 92. Vol. XVIII.— November, 1910. 

ever, a work of art yields itself to repro- 
duction, or is offered in the open market 
for barter or for sale, it becomes a mere 
commodity, a commercial asset, not neces- 
sarily of more than commonplace interest. 
It is a matter, therefore, of the greatest 
importance that the organizers of these 
great exhibitions should bear in mind the 
wide difference between objects of pure 
artistic interest and value, and those which 
are put forward for the ends of commerce, 
since the value of the latter can be covered 
by insurance. 

The disastrous fire at the Brussels Inter- 
national Exhibition has naturally caused 
considerable alarm among the owners of 
works of art, and especially those who 
have been relied upon so often for their 
generosity in allowing others to participate 
in the luxury of their possessions. Special 
precautions had, however, been taken at 
Brussels to house the loan collections of 
works of art, as such, in a separate building, 
where the risk of damage was practically 
non-existent. Deeply as we must all regret 
the loss of treasures in the British and 
Belgian sections at Brussels, it must be 
recognised that these sections of the Ex- 
hibition were avowedly commercial in 
their intention, and partook of the nature 
of a great bazaar with all the concomitant 
risks of their environment. 

At the great International Exhibition 
to be held in Italy next year, the com- 
mercial portion to be located at Turin, and 
that devoted to the Fine Arts to be held 
in the grounds of the famous Villa Borghese 
at Rome, we are informed that special 
care is being exercised to insure that the 
British section of the Fine Arts Exhibition 
shall be housed in a separate building 
under special British supervision, provided 
and controlled by the Exhibitions Branch 


International Exhibitions and Loans of IVorks of Art 

of the Board of Trade as a matter of 
national interest. The appreciation of the 
British Schools of the Fine Arts, both 
past and present, has advanced with such 
leaps and bounds in Continental art circles 
that all lovers of art must hope to see 
in the Exhibition at Rome as complete 
a selection as possible, unbiassed and 
catholic throughout, sufficient to illustrate 

every phase of the development of the 
Fine Arts in this country and our colonies. 
The Fine Arts at such an Exliibition afford 
an expression of a nation's character and 
temperament, and in many of the decora- 
tive applied arts, especially furniture, the 
British school has already a high repu- 
tation which it should be our pride to 


IT is a curious illustration 
lof our national lack of 
■coherent ideas in matters 
dating to public con- 
[venience or pleasure, that 
[the very month which 
has witnessed the meeting of a Town 
Planning Congress in London, and the 
opening of a Town Planning Exhibition 
at the Royal Academy, should have also 
witnessed the completion of a building, 
which locally, historically, or artistically 
violates and sets at naught the inten- 
tions of Mr. John Burns's new 
Act. A Mephistopheles, moreover, 
would rejoice to learn that the very 
town, which so lately by piteous appeal 
succeeded in arousing public sym- 
pathy to an extent sufficient to rescue 
a famous historical landscape of national 
interest from destruction, should of its own 
knowledge, and to a certain, though limited, 
extent of its own participation, have at 
the same time been a consenting party to 
an act of even more wilful destruction and 
desecration within a few yards ot the spot 
which national sympathy had secured to 
them for ever. 

We allude to the construction of a new 
theatre at Windsor, immediately under the 
walls of the Castle, whereby the historic 
and time-honoured view of the Castle 
from the river is ruined and defaced, and 
the equally historic view from the walls 
of the Castle itself still more grievously 
impaired. Even if this building were a 
triumph of architectural beauty, it would 
be none the less an unwelcome intruder; 
but as it is a shapeless, featureless mass 
of plain yellow brick, it is nothing but a 
national eyesore. An attempt has been 
made to shift the blame for this horror on 
to the shoulders of the Lord Chamberlain, 
but the Lord Chamberlain's instructions 
as to theatres were all well known and 
recognized before the proprietors of the 
theatre had a brick laid, or before the 
architect, Mr. Verity, put pen to his 
paper. The Lord Chamberlain has no 
concern in the matter, except as regards 
the safety of the pubUc. The theatre 
itself is a commercial speculation affec- 
ting its proprietors, but the design for 
this building is Mr. Verity's, and Mr. 
Verity must be held responsible for this 
national eyesore. 



as the 


from apathy the 
seer. In a year 

HE statue known 
Fiiiiciiilla (I'Aitzio, 
less than twelve months ago 
into the Museo delle Terme, 
has already gathered around 
it the veil of mystery that 
adds zest to the theories of 
the connoisseur and stirs 
indifferent glance of the sight- 
rich m artistic sensations, the 
FanciuUa certainly bids fair to take the lead. 
The romantic story of its discovery in the first 
instance, and the prodigious sum (larger, it seems, 
than any yet given for an antique work of art) 
paid for it by the Italian Government would alone 
have assured its success in the world of artistic 
fashion. Then, while archaeologists and critics 
were vying with one another as to who should solve 
rcnigina bello and discover the meaning of the 
statue, its date and its artist, i\ie Faitciulla suddenly 
underwent a change of sex— a singular fact which 
not unnaturally attracted the attention of the whole 
European press and was duly celebrated both in 
verse and in prose. La dame qui a perdu son sexe 
had here stolen a march on la dame qui a perdu 
son peintre. And as if all this were not enough, it is 
now rumoured that the work, which till lately was 
extolled as 'one of the noblest creations of the 
Greek genius,' may be a mere ' Roman ' pasticcio. 
It seems time to disentangle actual fact from the 
network of exaggeration and paradox, and so 
endeavour to reach a sane and sober judgment of 
a statue which, even if we decline to place it on 
the same pedestal with the works of Pheidias or of 
Praxiteles, will yet be found to possess undeitiable 
charm and distinction. My aim in what follows 
is to sift the opinion of others, rather than to 
make any novel contribution to an already well- 
worn subject. 

The romantic circumstances of the discovery of 
the statue are now a matter of history.^ The 
beautiful figure appears on the scene, the gift, as it 
were, of the goddess Fortune to that city of Antium 
where was her most splendid shrine. On the 
morrow of a stormy night of December, 1878, 
fishermen, it is said, first descried it still standing 
on a brick pedestal within the niche of a terrace 
wall that runs along the coast of Anzio at the 
Arco Muto. Till then the wall had been hidden 

1 Fully told by L. Mariani, 'La Giovinetta di Anzio,' in 
' Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale,' 1909, 
and by I. I. Svoronos in 'Journal International d'archeologie 
numismatique,' 1909-1910, pp. 209 ff. At thetime of writing this 
article the paper oi' Svoronos has not yet appeared, but he has 
been so good as to send me proofs of the first thirty-one pages. 
Over forty articles have appeared on the Fanciidla, exclusive of 
notices and paragraphs in tlie daily papers. In what follows I 
shall take into account only tlie chief articles, and for the sake 
of brevity shall generally refer to them by the name of the 

by a jutting piece of land, made up of the debris 
of extensive Imperial buildings which were carried 
away by the fury of the sea. From the excellent 
quality of its opus reticnlaium of the best period,- 
the terrace with niches which was then disclosed 
doubtless belonged to the celebrated Villa of Nero, 
whose good taste in sculpture is once more 
indicated by the statue now under discussion.^ 
According to tradition, the fishermen only got 
hold of the upper nude portion, which is in a 
separate block. This, however, after long and 
complicated negotiations, they were compelled to 
restore to the lawful owner of the land, Don 
Ludovico Chigi, Prince of Sarsina. The bust 
was now united to the draped lower half, and the 
whole was removed to the Prince's villa, where it 
stood for a time in the garden, and subsequently 
in the house itself. The statue was published, 
together with an account of the excavation, by 
Commendatore R. Rosa in ' Notizie degli Scavi' for 
1878, but dismissed as an unimportant product of 
the Antonine period. 

In the spring of 1897, nineteen years after its 
original discovery, I was so fortunate as to see the 
statue, which struck me at once as a work of great 
merit, unduly neglected because of Rosa's unfor- 
tunate report.*' I had no opportimity, however, 
to stir up interest, beyond mentioning the statue 
to several friends. I therefore learned with satis- 
faction after my return to England that a 
photograph of the statue had fallen under the 
eyes of the excellent connoisseur, L. Pollak, who 
had at once communicated it to his friend, 
Professor W. Klein, of Prague. On Klein now 
devolved the honour of first vindicating in print 
the artistic value of the statue, which he inclined 
to regard as the work of Leochares.' The 
villa of Prince Sarsina soon became the goal 
of repeated archaeological pilgrimages. The 
Fanciulla was now published with a critical 
analysis of its style by the late Professor Altmann, 
who clearly saw that the workmanship was of the 
early Hellenistic period.^ This, too, was the 
"opinion of Professor Amelung, who shortly after- 
wards contributed a detailed and elaborate text 
to accompany the splendid reproduction in the 
'Brunn-Bruckmann Denkmaler' for 1903.'= The 

2 The terrace is divided into two parts by a semi-circular 
recess (c in tig. I), once furnished with seats arranged in tiers; 
on either side were the smaller niches for statues. 
3 See E. Strong, ' Roman Sculpture ' (1907). P- i03- 
3" It is but fair to state that the importance of the statue was 
first perceived by the gifted and learned Signora Margherita 
Mengarini, at whose villa at Anzio I was then staying and who 
kindly took me to see the FanciuUa. But on patriotic con- 
siderations, for fear the statue might be purchased by foreigners, 
Signora Mengarini forbore for many years from mentioning it 
outside her own immediate circle. 
■< W. Klein, ' Praxitelische Studien ' (1S99), PP- 39-56- 
^W. Altmann, 'Das Miidchen von Antium,' in ' Oeslerrei- 
chische Jahreshefte,' VI, 1903, p. 186 and Plate VII. 
" Nos. 583, 584. 


T^aphricphoros {the Laurcl-hearcr) 

Italian Goveininent could no longer remain in- 
different to the growing fame of the statue and 
the consequent growing danger of its purchase 
by the foreigner. After prolonged negotiations 
the Government agreed to buy the statue for 
450,000 lire, a sum which we are assured might 
easily have been doublcil had the statue come 
into the open market. To commemorate the 
event, Professor Loewy pronounced an eloquent 
speech in honour of the Faitciiilla in May, igoj,' 
but it was not till the 9th October, 1909, that the 
contract to purchase was defmitely fulfilled. The 
very next day the statue was triumphantly moved 
to Rome, and safely lodged in the Museo delle 

Certainly the last thing I expected was that 
when, after a lapse of twelve years, I should 
see the statue once more, my first, almost instan- 
taneous impression would be that the figure, 
celebrated as a ' maiden,' was in reality male. I 
think what struck me first was the musculature of 
the left arm, the boyishness of the face and the 
breadth of the thora.x ; I next became aware that 
the breast, far from being, as was generally stated, 
tiie unformed breast of a very young girl, displayed 
the strong pectoral forms of a robust and well- 
developed youth.'" As the impression gradually 
deepened into conviction, I expressed my views in 
a letter to the 'Times,' which appeared on January 
3rd. Signor Attilio Simonetti, who actually antici- 
pated me in print by a few days,** and Dr. Paul 
Hartwig, who contributed a short article on the 
subject to ' Die Woche ' of January 15th, likewise 
held the statue to be male, and such, too, I sub- 
sequently learnt, had been the opinion of more 
than one competent connoisseur who had seen it 
in the Anzio days. Yet the view that the statue 
which was fascinating the world as the Ftiiiciiilla, 
the Virgiiictta, the AiiccUa, the Maiden or Koic 
par excellence, w^as in reality that of a boy 
proved an unexpected surprise, rousing anger in 
some and amused incredulity in others. M. S. 
Reinach laughed at the idea with his 

Miitaril sexnin feutina : Xrupe pner!^ 
and in the city of Pasquino epigrams flowed freely. 

Though recourse was had to both laughter and 
tears no serious attempt was made in disproof of 
the theory. As a fact, as we shall see in the sequel, 
practically every archaeologist of importance has 

'E. Loewy, ' La stalua di Anzio ' in ' Emporium ' for August, 

'a At the time I made tliese comments to certain English 
friends who were visiting the Terme Museum with me. I 
subsequently discussed my view on two occasions with Pro- 
fessor Loewy (once in presence of the distinguished young 
Italian archaeologist, Signorina Morpurgo;. Loewy, however, 
so entirely disagreed with me, that, in deference to his high 
authority, I postponed the publication of my theory. 

^ ' Tribuna,' 24th December, 1909. 

^' Revue archeologique,' 1909, p. 472. See also the charming 
epigram by Savignoni quoted by P. Gauclder in his communi- 
cation to the ' Academic des Inscriptions' (' Comptes Rendus ' 
for 1910, p. 41). 

been struck by the masculine traits of the Fanciulla, 
and has only been prevented by preconception 
from arriving at the truth. Moreover, the view 
that the statue is male is now held by numerous 
artists and art critics, and by at least one eminent 
physician'"; that archaeologists are slowly veering 
round to it seems uidicatecl by the short but appo- 
site remarks on the subject of the Fauciiilln 
contributed to the 'Tribuna ' of August 17th by a 
young Italian numismatist, Signor Furio Lenzi." 
Before attacking the vexed question we must 
examine the statue in detail. 


The statue represents a draped figure standing 
in a well balanced pose with the weight on the 
left foot and the right leg entirely relaxed. It is 
1.70 m. high, or about life size. Against its left 
side the figure holds a dish upon which are 
remnants of a laurel twig, of a roll of stuff, and 
two diminutive lion's paws ; fragments of a small 
wreath, which probably lay on the lost part of the 
platter, have been found separately. 'There were 
also discovered two fingers of the left hand (the 
fourth and fifth) and a few fragments of uncertain 

The marble is fine, white and crystalline. It 
has been said that the draped portion, with the 
feet, the left arm and the tray, are of Pentelic, the 
nude upper parts, with the right arm and the head, 
of Parian marble. There is a slight difference in 
quality between the two, as if a somewhat inferior 
block had been employed for the lower part, but 
the difference is not great enough, I think, to 
warrant the assumption that the two blocks are from 
widely distant quarries. This custom of working a 
statue in two or more parts is now familiar from 
many examples. The Dt.';;u'/t'ro/A';//(/o5 in the British 
M useum seems to offer an example exactly analogous 
to the Fanciulla, since the head, which is worked 
separately, is of distinctly finer marble than the 
body. It is notorious that the Hermes of Olympia, 
the Nike of SainotJirace and the ApJirodite of 
Melos are all completed by means of pieces patched 
on to the original, but apparently inadequate, 
block, and that the torso of the Belvedere and the 
Apliiodilc of Arles^- must, to judge from the cut of 
the surfaces, have been built up in the same way. 
If the neck does not now fit the draped part with 
absolute accuracy at the back, it is because the 
blocks had become loosened and suffered corrosion 
at the edges (Altmann, p. 191). Moreover the 
back had, like the left side, been obviously 
neglected, since the statue is intended to be viewed 
on the right side only. 

The statue has unfortunately not escaped damage, 
as will be seen from the reproductions given here. 

'" Quoted by Gauckler, ib., p. 46, note 3. 

" He promises a fuller article in the ' Rivista Numismatica.' 

1^ Klein, ' Praxitelische Studien,' p. 43. 






■ V 

- y 



T^aphnephoros (the Laurel-bearer) 

Some small original fragments have been fitted 
to their places. The patch in the projecting fold 
over the left leg was found broken and added on. 
A splinter of the right upper arm or iimcnis, with 
part of the dowel hole, was also found, and may be 
seen adjusted to the statue in Mariani's plate. 

The flesh is polished and the hair and drapery 
left rougher than the flesh, after a fashion that goes 
at least as far back as the Hcniics of Olyinpia. The 
hair is longish ; it is parted down the cranium, 
brought back in two strands to the front, and 
tied over the forehead into a knot, with artistic 
asymmetry ; i.e., in order to avoid too heavy a 
shadow over the brow, the knot is purposely 
placed somewhat to the left. One lock strays to 
the right from this central loop, and on either 
side little curls escape in front of the ears, where 
they are sketched in low relief. The main strands 
are then enlivened by a number of chisel strokes 
intended to imitate the separate wisps ; a similar 
treatment is adopted in order to break up the 
main surfaces of the drapery into tiny folds. By 
another curious asymmetry the left ear is com- 
pletely visible, while only the lobe of the right 
ear is allowed to peep from below the concealing 

The drapery is composed of an under-robe or 
chiton of woollen material, which is made to cling 
softly round the leg at ease, and is then drawn 
into heavy vertical folds, falling between the legs 
and over the supporting left leg, where it is caught 
up so as to leave the left foot and ankle bare.'^ 
This chiton slips from the right arm and discloses 
the shoulder and neck on that side ; it is folded 
over so as to form an apoptyguia, and is girt twice 
— once round the waist under the fold, and once 
again high above the waist in the fashion that makes 
its appearance after the third century." This second 
girdle is knotted close under the right breast. The 
knot seems clear, and I do not make out the grounds 
for Mariani's supposition that the marble band is 
merely a strip scooped out {incavaio) to receive the 
girdle of metal. Over the chiton is a second 
drapery, too narrow, perhaps, to deserve the name 
of hitnation, yet it is of considerable length, for 
it is thickly twisted about the left shoulder, where 
it forms a roll that is continued round the waist. 
From the waist the cloak falls over the back and 
right hip to about mid-thigh ; it is then pulled up 
in front, brought back to the left side, where it is 
held in place by the left elbow, and allowed to flow 
downwards to the height of the knee. The bunch 
of drapery formed under the arm helps to broaden 
the support for the platter held against the hip. 

All this heavy drapery from the waist downwards 
so conceals the form that we are left to infer the 
sex from the nude upper part. The formation of 

'■This motive seems unknown in female statues. 
"This high girding is peculiarly characteristic of the robed 
ApoUos of fourth and third-century art. 

the breast is one which may perhaps be found in 
the modern athletic woman ; so far it is, I believe, 
unknown in Greek art. Altmann supposed, indeed, 
that the breasts were purposely concealed ; Furt- 
wiingler dwells with emphasis on the breast 'as 
yet not entirely developed';'' Mariani (p. 183) 
alludes to the ' female body as yet not fully 
developed, especially in the scarcely prominent 
breast,' and Svoronos speaks of the ' childish 
and as yet scarcely perceptible breasts.' But 
the Fiinciiilla has neither small undeveloped 
breasts, nor the flat breast of a very young girl ; 
on the contrary, the pectoral muscle is unusu- 
ally developed and strongly accentuated. Now, 
anyone who has studied the Greek nude must 
be aware that in Greek female statues the pectoral 
muscle is concealed by the breasts, whether these 
be full as in maturity, or small as in girlhood, 
while, though more rarely, where the sculptor 
desires to emphasize extreme youth, all indication 
of breast will be absent.'"^ It is impossible to believe 
that a statue with the strong developed shoulder 
and throat of the Fanriulla should, did it re- 
present a female figure, be flat-breasted. It has 
been admitted, at least by Mariani (p. 179), that the 
breast appears very flat on the right side, but this, 
he says, is owing to corrosion at this point. But 
it is precisely the intact left side of the chest with 
its long-drawn curve — so different from the profile 
of the globe-like female breast" — that seems to me 
indubitably masculine. This curve is peculiarly 
characteristic of male draped statues, especially 
when the drapery is drawn down into a girdle. 
Without searching for examples outside the 
British Museum I find parallels in the celebrated 
Mansolos from Halikarnassos and in the draped 
Dionysos from the monument of Thrasyllos 
(CoUignon, ' Sculpture Grecque,' fig. 240), in both 
of which the marked curve of the breast is an 
effect of drapery over a highly developed pectoral 
muscle. A further most characteristic and instruc- 
tive instance is the Apollo Kitliaroidos of The 
Apotheosis 0/ Homer, by Archelaos of Priene. In 
the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, when 
Greek forms were not understood as they are now, 
this type of Apollo was frequently mistaken by 
the restorers — as in the Apotlieosis — for a Muse. 

But it is not the breast only which is masculine. 
Hartwig (p. 86) well points out the male character 
of the arm, with the clear division of the biceps. 
P'inally, so obvious is the male character of the 
head, that nearly every head brought up for 

'^Furtwangler, ' Das Madchen von Antium ' in ' Miinchener 
Jahrbuch' for 1907. 

"'E.g., in the statue of a quite young girl in the Munich 
Glyptothek reproduced by Furtwangler, I.e., p. 8. There can 
be no comp.arison between this flat, child's breast and the superb 
modelling of the Fauciiilla's chest. 

" For the form of the female breast at different periods of 
Greek art see the epoch-making article by S. Reinach, ' Un 
indice chronologique applicable aux figures femiuines dc I'art 
Grec,' in ' Kcvue des Etudes Grecques ' lor igoS. 


T>apJiriephoros {the Laurel-hearer) 

comparison with that of the Fauci iillu is, as we shall 
see, male. That clear tripartite division of the 
brow occurs, for instance, in the head of the 
Apollo Sauroktonos, in that of the IIy/<iios, and in 
those of the Apo/lo of Kyroic in the British 
Museum, and of the Apollo oj Tralles (Constanti- 
nople).'^ Amelung, indeed, specially emphasizes 
the fact that the constructive forms of the 
Fiiiiciitlla's face {Ic foniic coitnitlivc dd siio volto) 
are found again inthe two ApoUos.'-' Two heads 
of boys, the Eros stringing his bow (the Archer) 
and that of the Satyr piping {Fliitc-playcr)-" have 
likewise been brought into direct connection with 
the Faiicitilla. 

If it be objected that the neck lias the round 
shape and the three lines— the 'collier de Venus' 
— generally held to be typically feminine, I can 
only answer that the lines are not due to soft 
folds of flesh, but to the compression on the left 
side of the strong yet pliant muscle, and that 
precisely the same shape and formation of the 
throat, without indication of the pit of the 
neck, are found in the grand head of Dionysos — 
an undoubted Greek original— in the Sala del 
Gladiatore of the Capitol. (Reinach, 'Tetes 

Antiques,' PI. 205). 

So evident indeed 
Faiiciulla that they 

are the male 
have struck 

forms of the 
almost every 

artist who has seen the statue, and that archaeo- 
logists, assuming the statue to be female, have 
tried to explain them away. Professor Comparetti, 
for instance, who is so scornful of those who 
interpret the statue as male, yet dwells on its 
'active and virile ' aspect ('Bolletino d'Arte,' iQio, 
p. 48) ; while Professor Svoronos, in order to 
explain these virile forms, has been driven to the 
phantastic theory that the statue represents the 
Theban Manto, and that the artist has striven to 
express the dual sex which she inherited from her 
father Teiresias ! Mariani (pp. 182 and 177) calls 
our figure an 'adusta e quasi rustica giovinetta,' 
who promises to develop into a virago (poor 
Faitciiilla!); Delia Seta (' Bolletino d'Aite,' 1907, 
p. 22) calls her 'vigorous and agile,' and, what is 
more, has the following significant passage : — 

I do not know whether the peculiar dressing of the hair 
contributes to the impression, but it is undeniable that this 
feminine face has something of an Ephebe, and we might 
point out in our archaeological patrimony many male heads, 
Praxitelean or post-Praxitelean, in which the feminine 
element is more evident than in this head which is yet that 
of a girl ; and this, in my opinion, is not a discordant 
feature in the figure, for there are other details which the 
artist has expressly accentuated in order to exclude from 
the figure every sign of softness, and to give to the delicate 
form an imprint of severity, and perhaps these details are 
those which can help us most to the interpretation of the 
It is perhaps pardonable that a mere antiquary 

"Collignon, 'Sculpture Grecque,' 11, fig. 24S. 

■"Auiciung, ' Ausonia,' lit, p. 133. 

-"Collijjnon, '■ Sculpture Grecque,' II, fig. 232. This excellent 
comparison is due to Fraulein Margherita Bieber ; see Mariani, 
p. 204, note 3. 


like Pausanias should htive mistaken Apollo for a 
Muse on the Basis of Mantineia, or taken The 
CJiariotccr of Delphi, whiskers and all, to be 
female,'-' but that accomplished art critics should 
conlinue under the delusion that the evidently 
male Anzit) statue represents a young girl seems 
incredible, though it is only one more instance of 
the power of preconceived ideas. We shall 
immediately see that this error as regards the sex 
is the sole ground for mystery in the interpretation 
of the statue. 


The composition is so simple and direct, that 
the subject of the statue should not be difficult to 
discover. The central motive is evidently formed 
by the platter held against the left hip. The gaze 
is riveted on this point, and towards it also flow 
the main lines of the composition : the sweep of 
the drapery-' and the movement of the lost right 
arm, which crossed the body, the right hand being 
connected somehow with the objects on the 
platter. It is therefore important to try to deter- 
mine these objects. For this we must examine in 
some detail the three fragments of the platter 
which have been preserved. The central piece 
with the laurel twig is still attached to the statue ; 
another fragment on the left has upon it the roll 
of stuff ; a third on the right has the two tiny 
lion's paws ; a further minuscule fragment be- 
longing to the centre of the platter is attached to 
the'left broken wrist of the statue. Then there is 
the small wreath which may have Iain on the 
platter ; its leaves, like those of the twig, appear to 
be laurel.-^ 

The tiny lion's paws which each rested on a 
minute basis can have been, according to Amelung's 
calculations, only three in number, and must have 
belonged therefore either to a small tripod or to 
some round utensil such as a cista or a Ihyiiiiatcrion 
or censer. According to the elaborate diagram of 
Svoronos (its correctness is disputed by Amelung) 
the box should be reconstructed as oblong; in 
this case it would still belong to the same class of 
ritual utensils, but might be an accrra or incense- 
box of the shape so commonly seen in vases and 
bas-reliefs, or a box such as the priest's attendants 
would carry to collect or redistribute the small 
tablets on which enquirers at oracles inscribed 
their questions. The roll to the left of the twig 
flows over the edge of the platter ; it was originally 
taken to be a parchment on which oracular 
responses had been inscribed (Altmann, p. 197), or 
else as containing the poem of a young poetess 
victorious in a literary contest (Amelung). Furt- 
wiingler showed the roll to be neither parchment 
nor papyrus, but a strip of stuff, presumably woollen, 

=' See C. Robert, ' Pausanias als Schriftsteller,' 1909, p. 63, 
22 Amelung also notes how the vertical folds of the drapery 

over the left leg are so massed as to give additional accent to 

the platter just above them. 
-•' Signor Boni believes they are olive. 

T^aphnephoros {the Laurel-bearer) 

which he interpreted as a sacrificial fillet (Opfer- 

There is nothing in ail this to take us outside the 
priestly cycle or that of the temple attendants ; the 
subject belongs to the adorantes, lustrantcs, sacvi- 
ficantes, in fact to the class of votive statues most 
frequently found in temples, and it is therefore 
among these that the most trustworthy autho- 
rities have sought for the explanation of the statue. 
Altmann thought of the priestess of the Apollo 
of Patara bringing the oracular responses ; 
Furtwangler of a young temple attendant 
carefully trimming her censer ; Anielung did 
not in reality move far outside this range of ideas 
with his votive statue of a victorious poetess, and 
returned to it, in the same article, with the sugges- 
tion that the ' maiden ' had served m one of the 
festivals of Apollo ; Loewy (nearest of all to the 
truth) surmised a vicarious victim charged with 
the ritual purification of a city or a land, and 
both Delia Seta and Mariani incline to Loewy's 
opinion. I myself, arguing mainly from the 
similarity of the objects on the platter to those 
that surround the well-known bust of an Archi- 
gallus in the Museo dei Conservatori, had thought 
for a time that the statue might represent a young 
priest of Cybele, an opinion, however, which I am 
ready to drop, because the personage portrayed 
is obviously too young to have achieved those 
higher grades of initiation w-hose priests alone 
wore female garments in visible token of perfect 
union with the goddess.-' The \onga cum vcslc 
sacenlos is a familiar figure to both literature and 
art, but the studied disarray of the Anzio figure 
does not accord with regular sacerdotal functions 
and must be explained more probably by reference 
to some ritual of an occasional nature. The cha- 
racter of the figure, the unusual way of wearing the 
raiment, its intentional disorder, combined with 
the intentness of the action, had led Loewy to in- 
terpret the Faiiciitlla as a vicarious victim, a human 
scapegoat chosen to bear the burden of sin and 
suffering of a city or people. In connection with 
this idea we should remember, further, Amelung's 
alternative theory'-" that the statue might represent 
one of the maidens chosen for the chorus that 
followed the boy Daphnephoros or Laurel Bearer 
at the Daphnephoria or festival of Apollo 
Ismenios at Thebes. Had Loewy and Amelung 

^Professor Svoronos believes that the substance is too thiciv 
for a fillet, and in an interesting passage tries to show that it is 
a piece of cloth such as is used in the Greek Church to cover the 
Eucharistic bread and wine. With this cloth he supposes the 
maiden to have covered the box which he takes to be a casket 
to hold prophetic tablets. See below, note 41. 

25 Farnell, ' Greek Cults,' III, p. 301. Mutilation likewise was 
only practised (and then by no means invariably) in the higher 
ranks of the priesthood. Therefore, no such stigma as is 
generally supposed, attached to the interpretation I suggested 
in my ' Times ' letter (see, for instance. Svoronos, p. 220). Nor 
is there anything of the iiigtiis semivir of Juvenal about the 
delicate ascete of the Conservatori relief. 

^^Brunn-Bruckmann, 'Denkmaler,' No. 5S3. 

discerned the sex of the figure, they would have 
come very near to solving its mystery. Dr. Hartwig, 
who has arrived independently at the conclusion 
that the statue is male, easily fixed upon its 
probable subject. He himself had discovered 
some years ago, in the Castellani collection at 
Rome, a vase picture which affords the desired 
clue. The picture, which was published by Dr. 
Hauser,-' represents a youthful figure wearing a 
laurel wreath, clothed in a long chiton and 
Iiiiiiatioii, with the right hand held up in adora- 
tion ; behind the figure a temple is summarily 
indicated by a column ; and in front is a large 
loittcrion or lustral basin on a low pedestal ; over 
this basin the figure holds with the left hand a 
a large laurel bough. Dr. Hauser recognized the 
figure to be that of a boy, and referred the whole 
scene to the Purification-feast of the Pyanepsia, 
when a boy, son of living parents (irar^ aji4ndaXrj<;), 
was tricked up in female garments and appointed 
to fasten the 'Eiresione' or laurel bough on 
the door of the teiiiple of Apollo.-'* It is almost 
incredible that in the light of the figure of 
the Castellani vase all imcertainty as to the sex 
and subjects of the Anzio statue should not have 
vanished at once. It is but fair to add that 
Dr. Hartwig, whose promised paper is certain to 
throw further light upon points of detail, has 
given in his preliminary note no indication of 
what his own ultimate interpretation of the st.atue 
is likely to be. Owing to the peculiar character 
of the figure it seems as if its meaning should be 
sought in some ritual akin doubtless to the Attic 
Pyanepsia, but with more definitely purificatory 
ceremonies of expiation attached to it. Thus it 
might be surmised that the statue represents the 
chiei Daplnuflioros, the boy leader chosen for his 
beauty and his strength from one of the noble 
houses at Thebes to be the priest of Apollo 
Ismenios for the space of one year ' . . . they call 
him the laurel-bearer, for all boys bear crowns of 
laurel,' says Pausanias ; and from another source 
we learn that ' this boy walked at the head of the 
procession, holding the laurel, with long hair 
flowing on his shoulders, wearing a golden crown, 
clad in shining raiment to his feet, and shod in 
shoes called iphikratidcs."-'^ The laurel bough was 
the recognized instrument of Ka'^apo-is or lustration-'* 
(Farnell, IV, p. 3oof.), Apollo hiinself being wor- 
shipped in places under the title of ' Laurel-Bearer.' 
Thus like the similar ritual at Delphi, the Theban 
festival of the laurel-bearing was one of purification. 
At Delphi, indeed, ' the ritual was explained as an 
imitation of the slaughter of the Python by Apollo 
and the subsequent purification of the god, the 

-'Philologus, Vol. viii (i8q5), pp. 38-395, and plate. 

27a For other rites in which men appear dressed as women 
see Frazer's 'Pausanias,' III, p. 197. 

28 L. Farnell, ' Cults of the Greek States,' IV, p. 284 f. 

™A laurel bough was regularly employed as a holy water 
sprinkler, though such is not its function in this case. 


IDaphtJcpJioros {the Laurel- hearer) 

particular Delphian 

by the description of 
very near to our statue 
grace, its serious and 

purification having apparently consisted in a year's 
servitude and the wearing of the laurel.'-'" Dr. Farnell 
(IV, p. 293) gives a vivid pictiue, {gathered Irom 
the ancient authors, of the 
ritual known as the Stcptciia. 

On a certain day in" spring, a noble Delphian boy, con- 
spicuous probably for his beauty, proceeds with a band of 
boys chosen from the best families, under the escort of 
certain sacred women called ' Oleiai,' who carry torches and 
conduct the youths in silence to a cei tain cabin that was 
c instructed near the Pythian table in the forin of a royal 
palace, and which was regarded as the abode of Python ; 
this ithey set fire to and overturn tlie tabic, and withuu 
looking round, tly through the doors of the temple. Then 
the boy leader feigns to go into exile and even servitude ; 
afterwards they all proceed together to Tcmpe, where they 
arc purified at an altar: having plucked the sacred laurel that 
grew there and made crowns for themselves with its leaves, 
they all return home along the sacred Pythian way . . . 
and in a villase near Larissa, Deipnias, ' the village of the 
banquet,' the boy leader partakes of a solemn meal, probably 
a sacrament ; and the sacred laurel they bring back, serves 
to fashion the crowns for the Pythian victors. 

Many will doubtless recall in this connexion, 
Leighton's great picture of the Daphucphor'ui. 
The image conjured up ' ' ' 
these Boy Leaders comes 
with its youth and virile 
serene expression. 

The objects on the platter, so far as we can iden- 
tify them, perfectly support the theory. These are 
the laurel l30ugh, the woollen fillet, the three lion's 
paws which may have belonged to a small tripod 
— dedicated in the ' holy places of golden tripods '^' 
by the boy after his service to the god — and a 
wreath, too small indeed to have been worn, but 
bestowed, perhaps, after the ceremony. On the 
missing part of the platter probably were other 
ritual objects, cakes may be, such as were carried 
at the ' Eiresiom; ' festival at Athens, or the like. 

Then, Mariani has pointed out that a metal 
wreath may have lain in the depression behind 
the roll of hair, and such a wreath would have been 
in accordance with actual custom and with the 
descriptions of the ancient authors. As regards 
the hair itself, the manner in which it is done up 
may be compared with the hair-dress of certain of 
the Ephebes, on a cup referred by Dr. Hartwig 
to the festival of the' Oinisteria' (' Meisterschalen,' 
65 and 66 ; text p. 590). Hauser (p. 390) had 
quoted the cup in his discussion of the Castellani 

Farnell (IV, p. 286) lays special stress on the 
temporary apotheosis of the boy-priest who is the 
living incarnation of Apollo. What more natural 
than that proud parents or grateful citizens should 
put up a statue in honour of the boy who had been 
judged worthy of the highest religious service, had 

""Frazer's ' Pausanias,' V, p. 42. 

^' To his account of the Boeotian Daphnephoria Pausanias 
adds : ' I am not clear whether it is the custom of all boys who 
have worn the laurel lo dedicate the bronze tripod to the god 
. . . but the wealthier boys certainly dedicate them ' ; ancl it 
has been suggested that these tripods might sometimes be of 
small or even diminutive size ; see Amelung's note to ' Brunn- 
Bruckmann,' 5S3, 584. 


been looked upon for a year as the incarnation of 
thcgotl himself, and taken ujion himself, as piacular 
victim, the sin of the community and obtained 
through expiatory rites the purification of his 
people. Loewy's description of the Anzio statue 
tits the case exactly : — 

It would be a thought in harmony with the delicacy of 
Greek religious feeling, and one which in Greek art itself 
has not a few parallels, for llie family or the community to 
dedicate a siiiiilar statue— and who knows whether only 
one ? — in a holy place, whether after some desolating 
scourge or even without any such motive, as a manifesta- 
tion of permanent piety, of tlie perpetual desire for purity. 
Perennially the image would stand tliere to intercede for 
its people, and perennially, too, the open and serene 
countenance would assure them of the divine favour. 

The boyish dignity of the figure, its undoubted 
beauty of feature and line, the strength of the 
muscular development ; the accent of importance 
which the artist has given to the business in hand 
without yet detracting from the look of innocent 
simplicity of the person portrayed are just what 
we should expect of one chosen to perform solemn 
expiatory rites such as took place, we have seen, at 
the Apolline festivals. The view that the statue 
represents a Daphnephoros or Laurel-bearer at a 
ritual of purification is in harmony, moreover, with 
all the best attempts hitherto made to interpret it. 
We have seen that Delia Seta and Mariani concur in 
Loewy's theory of a piacular victim ; that Altmann 
and Amelung sought for an explanation of the 
motive within the Apolline cycle. The statue 
remained das schonc Riitscl, V enigma hello, to Copalov 
atviyixa Only because of the obsession under which 
everyone laboured with regard to its sex. To 
think it female was the idea perliirbalricc, and 
not the reverse. We now see that the 'excellent 
artist ' quoted by Mariani, who, being an artist, 
naturally recognized the figure as male, was not so 
far from the truth when he called the Fauci id I a 
an Apollo, since for the time being the Daphne- 
phoros icas in truth the god himself. 

We may note finally that even the far-fetched 
interpretations of the statue as Cassandra and as 
Manto did not stray from the Apolline cycle. But 
it was a curious idea to charge with dramatic 
meaning so serene a conception as our Dapliiie- 
plioros, to connect that calm young visage, that 
fresh bloom or ephebic beauty, with the ravings of 
the deflowered and desolate daughter of Priam. 
Nor is the notion that the statue represents yet 
another victim of the god, Manto, daughter of the 
blind seer Teiresias . . . sala Tiresia, ventiiri prescia 
Maiito, more fortunate. No inspired mood — 
whether poetic or prophetic — disturbs the youthful 
figure, whose abasement, as Mariani justly observes, 
is purely external. True, Svoronos claims that 
the statue represents not Manto the prophetess, but 
the girl Manto of the ' Phoenician Women ' of 
Euripides (Eur. Plioeii. 11. 834 ff.) who tenderly 
guides the footsteps of her blind father, and guards 
his 'prophetic sentences' with her 'maiden hand' 

T^aphnephoros (the Laurel-bearer) 

(irapOiVM xepi.).^' The theories of Svoronos and of 
Comparetti flow ahke from a desire to invest the 
statue in modern eyes with the added charm of a 
definite personahty. They are not content, as 
Mariani has well pointed out, with the direct ideas 
of antique art, with the simple phraseology of its 
art criticism ; for a piier orans or a piiella sacri- 
ficans, they wish to substitute a definite character 
with a story, and read into the statue intentions 
that were far enough from the mind of the ancient 

But literary illustration of this kind was alien 
from the Greek genius ; why therefore have re- 
course to an antiquated method of interpretation, 
to explain a work whose proto-type is there to 
our hand among the figures of ritual and cere- 
monial, in those religious observances whence 
Greek art drew its profoundest inspiration ? In 
place of being a mere detached and incidental 
literary illustration our Anzio statue becomes then, 
what its best interpreters have instinctively felt it 
to be from the first, a precious relic of one of the 
most august and characteristic of Hellenic rituals. 


As if to confirm what has just been said of the 
relation of the Anzio figure to the ritual of Apollo, 

^2 Svoronos bases his theory mainly on the supposed resem- 
blance between the Anzio statue and the Thessalian nymph on 
coins of Trilika and Feliniia, which he interprets as the Theban 
Manto, and the priestess or prophetess who appears in certain 
Pompeian paintings, and whom he likewise supposes to he 
Manto. But the likeness is only superficial. The figure on the 
coin of Pelinna has long flowing hair ; the figure on the coin of 
Trikka has hair gathered into a knot above the forehead, etc. 
The priestesses of the Pompeian wall-paintings, on the other 
hand, reproduce ordinary schemes, adaptable to any figure, 
whetlier male or female, carrying a tray or similar object. 
Svoronos, however, considers his Manto to have been in a 
group with her father, and believes the head of the Teiresias to 
have survived in three copies one of which is the well-known 
Epimenides of the Vatican. But the original of these must 
be dated some lOo years earlier than the Fancinlla. For 
Svoronos the casket on the dish is the KX-oponph within which 
Manto guards the prophetic xXiipoi of Teiresias, and the frag- 
ments, hitherto unexplained (above, p. 72), would belong to a 
divining rod— similar in shape to the Roman lilntis or augural 
sUfi — which would be on the tray. It seems difficult, however, 
according to what Amelung writes to Svoronos himself, to 
accept these fragments as those of a litiiiis. But where does 
Svoronos find his evidence of a group at all ? According 
to the newspaper reports (for this part of his article has not 
reached me), in a passage of Pausanias (Frazer's translation. 
Vol. I, p. 464), where it is stated that there was at Thebes what 
was called the ' Observatory of Teiresias.' Here, argues 
Svoronos, a statue of the blind seer and his daughter Manto 
would have been in place. This may be, though Pausanias 
makes no mention of any such group. Then Svoronos proceeds 
to argue that since the Athenian artist, Xenophon, made, with 
a Boeotian colleague, Callistonicus, the group of Wealth witli 
Peace in her Arms in the sanctuary adjoining this ' Observatory 
of Teiresias,' the same two artists made the group of Teiresias 
and Manto for the observatory itself. But Xenophon and 
Callistonicus were contemporaries of the elder Cephisodotus, 
and lived three-quarters of a century before the date to which 
the Anzio statue can at earliest be assigned. While thus dis- 
agreeing with the main thesis of Professor Svoronos, it is 
impossible not to admire his ingenuity and learning, or the 
rpass of interesting detail he has brought forward. 

we find, when we come to consider the school 
which produced it, its nearest analogies in two 
splendid presentments of the god. Amelung'' has 
seen that our Daphiiephoros is inseparable from the 
statue of Apollo known from its finest replica as 
the Apollo of Cyrene (Brit. Museum Cat. 1380, 31). 
The likeness between the heads has already been 
pointed out (above, p. 78). But it is not only 
in the treatment of the facial forms, or of the 
hair, that the two statues resemble one another, but 
also in the forms of the nude and of the drapery. 
It is as if the sculptor had derived his inspiration 
for the statue of an Apolline ministrant direct from 
his loftier conception of the god himself. In the 
Anzio statue the face is longer, but the shape 
of the face with its strong energetic oval, the 
manner in which the inner angles of the eyes are 
slightly drawn inwards, the whole shape of the 
ocular cavity, the somewhat high cheek-bones, the 
modelling at the root of the nose, the corners of 
the lips — all are closely analogous. The similarity 
makes itself felt even in such trifling details as the 
strand of hair that escapes in front of the ear in 
both heads. Then, both statues have in common 
the strong musculature with its covering of soft 
flesh — indicative not of eft'eminacy, but of healthy 
strength — and the system of drapery with its 
obvious decorative quality. Notice the rolled 
drapery which passes round the waist of the 
Daphncphoros and slips to mid-thigh in the Apollo, 
and the manner in which the angle between the 
head and left shoulder is filled up by folds of 
drapery in both statues. Though less of the nude 
shows in the Daphnephovos than in the Apollo, we 
have the same effective contrast between the 
heavy mass of folds and the youthful body.'* The 
flower-like quality imparted by this contrast of nude 
and draped parts has been well felt by Svoronos, 
who compares the young limbs that rise from the 
enfolding drapery to the calyx of a rose peeping 
from among its petals. It is true that the nude 
in the Anzio statue has a soft brilliance, a supple 
texture, which we would seek for in vain in the 
Cyrene Apollo, and which recalls rather the nude 
of the Heimcs of Olympia. But this means no 
more than that the Apollo is a copy, while both 
Hermes and Daphiiephoros are originals, and so 
preserve the master's touch. 

One further significant point of resemblance is 
in the feet, as broadly developed, across the instep, 
below the ankle, in the god as in the boy. I attach 
special importance to this particular because it has 
been argued (by Mariani and others) that the foot 
of the Anzio statue, owing to its breadth of instep, 
is female — in opposition to the longer, straighter 
male foot. 

Both statues are the outcome of one and the 

3' In ■ Ausonia,' III, 1908, p. 133, 

31 See also Amelung, ' Museums and Ruins of Rome,' p. 188, 
on the Capitoline replica of the Cyrene Apollo. 


l^apJiticpJioros (the Laurel-bearer) 

same artistic tradition— more tenacious of the 
decorative function of drapery than the School 
of Praxiteles, more failiiful than tlie Lysippians to 
the unilateral view ; yet neither entirely escapes 
the magic of Praxiteles {e.g., in the line of the 
profile),\vhile in construction and poise they postu- 
late the innovations of Lysippos.^ In the FaiiciiiUa 
especiallv, which is an original, the play of external 
influences over creative individuality is especially 
clear. A certain complexity in style and execution 
accounts doubtless for the difficulty experienced 
in assigning the work, which has been given to this 
master or fo that, according to the characteristics 
on which the attention of ^he critic happened to 
be focussed at the time. By Loewy the statue has 
been classed with Praxitelean works or their deriva- 
tives. Klein has detected in it Praxitelean combined 
with Lysippian elements and tried to assign it to 
Leochares ; Furtwiingler, again, inclined to iden- 
tify it as the Epithyonsa of Phanis, a pupil of 
Lysippos ; more lately M. Arvanitopoulos has seen 
in it the Pra.xilla of Lysippos, while Dr. Svoronos 
gives it to Xenophon, a sculptor of the early 
fourth centur}', and a contemporary of Cephi- 
sodotus, the father of Praxiteles. But these attribu- 
tions seem based on superficial points of likeness 
— such as may exist between works bearing the 
stamp of the same period that yet lack any intimate 
resemblance of formal detail or psychic inspiration. 
A tougher artistic fibre, so to speak, makes itself 
felt in our Daphiiephoros than in the works of 
the afore-mentioned schools. The compact sil- 
houette, the firm pose, differ essentially from the 
swaying movement affected by Lysippos and his 
followers, the heavy decorative draperies from the 
naturalistic Praxitelean rendering of tissue {e.g., 
Hermes of Olympia). Above all the clear emphasis 
laid on the central theme announces a downright, 
almost prosaic vein as compared with the dreamy 
detachment from external circumstance observed 
in Praxitelean figures, or the indifference of the 
Lysippians to anything save exquisite rhythm and 
perfect equipoise, their avoidance of any motive 
likely to impose a definite point of view and so 
disturb the effect of their shifting surfaces. 
35 See Mariani, p. 205, and his references to Loewy in note 7. 


MONG the pictures of the 
Yiian period in the Museum 
collection the most impressive 
is the large Three Rishi in a 
Moiiiitciin Haunt (No. 34 in the 
exhibition). The contempla- 
tive ecstasy and the remote, 
romantic atmosphere of the 

•For the first article see The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 
xvii, pp. 255-261 (August, 1910). The illustiations to both 
articles are from photographs taken by Mr. Lumley Cator. 


In the paper from which 1 have already quoted 
so often, Aiuelung connects the Apollo and the 
An/.io statue with the ApoUo of Tr<illes (Constan- 
tinople), and endeavours to trace back the group 
to the influence of Bryaxis. Only by striving to 
seize the personal iinpress in a work can we hope 
to discover its intrinsic quality, the secret of what- 
ever in it is individual and unique. But in the 
case of the Anzio statue it seems premature to give 
a name to the informing personality. 

None the less the statue affords a new and 
vivid point of light in the history of Greek 
sculpture just after Alexander, in those interesting 
years ranging from the close of the fourth century 
to the earlier Hellenistic period, till the time, that 
is, when a delinitely new spirit — the spirit of the 
Pergamene and kindred schools — played over 
the forms of Hellenic art and combined them 

3' On the question of the statue's date see also S. Reinach in 
• Gazette des Beaux- Arts,' 1910 (p. S4ff— ). As stated in note I, 
I only had Ihe proof of the first thirty-one pages of the article 
of Svoronos when I wrote the above. As I correct my proofs 
the complete article reaches me. I believe that in note 30 I 
have stated fairly the essential points of the theory of Svoronos, 
though I regret that for the second part of the article I only 
had the newspaper reports of the two lectures upon which the 
article is based. The plates are admirable, tliough I fear few 
will accept the audacious reconstruction on PI. VII of the 
liliiiis, the pd(35os or divining rod of the supposed Teiresias. 
The life-model in the pose of the Anzio statue on PI. XII shows 
once more how entirely the forms of a young, slim and some- 
what undeveloped girl differ from those of the statue. Of 
special value, by the side of Dr. Svoronos's own learned contri- 
butions, are the remarlcs imainly of a dissentient character !) 
sent him by Prof. Amelung and which Svoronos prints in full. 
He also gives a long extract from M; Gauckler's paper (above, 
note 9), but it seems unnecessary here to do more than allude 
to Gauckler's curious theory that it is a pasticcio of the Antonine 
period ; for according to him, some millionaire of the sect nd 
century A.D., not content with a bust of a good period of Greek 
art, wished for a whole statue ; he therefore commissioned an 
artist of the time to complete the bust by adding all the draped 
lower part of the body with the feet. Such an artificial com- 
bination is out of the question ; the composition, with its 
convincing central motive, is perfectly homogeneous ; there is 
no difference of style between the working of the two parts, 
and we have seen that it was a common practice of ancient 
sculptors to work a statue not only in separate pieces, but also 
to use different qualities of marble. It is a wonder that 
someone has not yet suggested that the millionaire had a 
prudish mind and replaced the undraped by the draped body, 
thus creating the delicate question of the sex of the statue. 
The least we can now expect is that the FanciuUa may yet be 
attributed to the immortal Lucas ! 


Taoist spirit penetrate the whole design. The heads 
of the three sages are drawn with the utmost sub- 
tlety and sti"ength ; and so powerful is the im- 
pression of wrapt absorption in the still figures, 
full of latent vigour though they are, that the misty 
waterfall gliding down the rocks behind them, the 
shadowy pines and the twisted plum-branches, 
breaking here and there into fragile blossom, seem 
to have lost material substance and to have become 
mere dreams of the contemplating mind. By 
whoni is this painting ? It was bought by Andersop 

X a 

2 < 
a z 

a > 

X z 

H 3 

a S 


Qhinese Paintings in the British Museum 

as an example of Yen Hui, a master of whom little 
is thought in China, though he enjoys immense 
fame in Japan ; but the ascription is probably due 
merely to the subject. For the same reason 
another Anderson picture, Vich Kivai Breathing 
Out Iiis Spiritual Essence, has been attributed to Yen 
Hui, or Ganki, as he is called by the Japanese, who 
is famous for his pictures of Rishi. In neither case 
can we suggest the actual author. The second 
painting, indeed, though on Chinese silk, may 
possibly be by a Japanese master. Japanese expert 
opinion is divided on the point, though on the 
whole inclined to favour a Chinese origin. A 
similar problem suggests itself with regard to a 
pair of vigorous monochromes, F.aglcs, which are 
not in the present exhibition (Anderson catalogue, 
9 and lo). Some critics have thought these to be by 
a Japanese master of the fifteenth century, follow- 
ing closely the Chinese traditions ; but they are 
more probably Chinese of the same date. 

A charming specimen of Yiian landscape is the 
Sage in tlie Forest (Exhibition No. 32), a pair of 
pictures forming one composition. This was 
particularlyadmired by the late Professor Fenollosa; 
and it was he who recognized in a pair of flower- 
pieces, catalogued by Anderson as Ming work, 
the hand of a master of the end of the Sung and 
beginning of the Yiian time. Certainly these two 
paintings (one is exhibited, No. 42), though con- 
siderably damaged, show the character in design 
which later periods never re-captured ; a certain 
solidity, a sense of the roundness of stems and the 
firm texture of leaves, the pale under-sides being 
used at once to enforce the pattern and to suggest 
the living growth of the plant, and along with this 
a certain depth and seriousness of mood. 

Something of the same solidity of design, on 
the way, perhaps, to becoming a little hard, is seen 
in another delightful flower and bird piece, which 
has been ascribed to the fourteenth-century master, 
Wang Jo-shui, famed in Japan as Ojakusui (No. 33 
in the exhibition). This has exquisite colour, and 
is well preserved. 

We now come to the Ming dynasty (fourteenth 
to seventeenth century). Of the paintings belong- 
ing to the earlier part of this period I would give 
the first place to the unsigned Phanixes from the 
Wegener collection [Plate II, b]. What strange 
life the painter has given to these fabulous crea- 
tures ! What distinction in the simple colour- 
scheme, a rare blue telling pale against a deep 
vermilion in the plumage, and both enhanced by 
the mellow brown of the background. The no- 
bility of the whole design is matched by the 
sensitive power of line in the wind-tossed foliage 
and the smaller feathers, and the superb sweeps of 
black — clean strokes of the full-charged brush — 
in the drooping tails. 

By the recent gift of Mr. Veitch, the Museum 
has become possessed of a dated picture by Wen 

Cheng-Ming, a noted master of the fifteenth and 
sixteenth centuries. This is The Hundred Stags, a 
great herd of dappled deer flocking down a moun- 
tain glen, a composition of extraordinary skill, full 
of movement and a sense of wild life. Side by 
side with work like this, in which colour is an 
integral part of the design, we find Ming painters 
also pursuing the tradition of ink-painting, so 
beloved of the Sung artists. To Lin Liang, 
perhaps the most renowned of the early Ming 
masters, Japanese authorities have ascribed a 
fine pair of monochrome pictures, ]Vild Geese 
among Lotuses and Rushes (Nos. 60 and 60* 
in the exhibition), though some critics would 
be content to assign them to an artist of his 
immediate following. At any rate, they are 
worthy of a master. The pair of lightly-coloured 
paintings, Nos. 63 and 65 in the exhibition, were 
pronounced by FenoUosa to be the finest works of 
Lii Chi, another of the best known fifteenth cen- 
tury masters, which he had ever seen. Beautiful 
as these are in feeling and atmosphere, we are 
conscious of a loss of sureness and intimacy, as of 
a painter enamoured of the serene simplicity of 
the Sung style but no longer wholly able to enter 
into its mood, the bent of his own time being 
towards a greater fulness of external realisation, as 
others of his known works show. The signature 
of Lii Chi has been added to the rich and glowing 
picture from the Wegener collection, Fowls, 
Bamboos and Flowering Tiees (Exhibition No. 62), 
but it is probably from his hand, and though 
perhaps on a lower level of conception, is more 
thoroughly successful than the pair beside it. 
The design of the flowering branches is of quite 
extraordinary beauty. Wu Wei's Man ivith a 
Faggot (Exhibition No. 67) is another vigorous 
specimen of monochrome, also from the Wegener 

Under the Ming dynasty a marked taste for 
genre and idyll comes in with Ch'iu Ying and 
T'ang Yin, whose pictures of Chinese beauties 
were to become classic favourites. The former 
master is so popular that his name is found added 
to works of all styles and periods. Genuine 
pictures seem to be very rare, only one or two, I 
believe, being known in Japan. His style is well 
illustrated by the makimono from the Franks col- 
lection (Exhibition No. 47), one of many known 
copies after a lost original. But we can hardly 
doubt that the small round painting of A Lady in 
a Pavilion (No. 71) is by the master's own hand, 
incomparably delicate and sure of touch as it is. 
Of several other paintings in the Museum which 
bear his name, or have been ascribed to him, the 
finest is the charming Sisters (Exhibition No. 70) 
from the Wegener collection, and a landscape from 
the same collection for which room could not be 
found in the gallery. Of the supplest delicacy is 
the series of small paintings of sages from ihe 


Qhiriese Paintings in the British Museum 

Franks collection by T'ang Yin, though we note 
a certain smallness and prettiness when compari- 
son is made with earlier work of the kind. The 
Pricsl u'itliaCa)iicl iiinoii^thcMoiinliiiiis{E\\\'ih\Uon 
No. 72) from the Wegener series, can h.irdly be 
anything but a later copy, but the conception and 
design are of extreme originality and boldness. 
We find here a kind of wittiness in the arbitrary 
drawing which is rare in Chinese art, though it 
could be often paralleled among the Japanese ; 
seldom, however, with the accompanying sense of 
grandeur which we find here. 

The idyllic strain of Ming art rises to splendour 
and an ampler atmosphere in the large picture of 
The Earthly Paradise, which is one of the chief 
treasures of the Wegener collection [Plate I]. 
The genius of Taoism has here transported us to 
its own cherished dreamland, a place of sensuous 
but spiritualised delight. Something of the 
Pritnarcra, without the Florentine touch of 
harshness and impetuosity, something of Watteau 
without his afterthought of melancholy, is recalled 
by this lovely composition, with its gracious 
grouping and its enchanting harmonies of colour ; 
yet it is wholly Chinese, and sums up an entire 
phase of Chinese art with luxurious fulness and 
intensity. And how easily does it take its place 
among the world's delightful paintings ! One 
would like to know the name of the painter and 
to identify other of his works ; and, perhaps, in 
time, when the Chinese private collections become 
better known, these will be revealed. This kind 
of picture does not seem to have appealed specially 
to Japanese taste. Among the published repro- 
ductions of iMing pictures in Japanese collections, 
there is nothing of this type which is of compar- 
able importance. 

Portraiture is comparatively rare in the art of 
the Far East. Of Ming portraits the Museum 
possesses a few good examples, the most striking 
being a very large portrait group from the Ander- 
son collection (No. 37 in his catalogue), the 
dimensions of which unfortunately made its exhi- 
bition in the present gallery impracticable. The 
heads in this picture are masterly in that method 
of fine economy of which Holbein, more than any 
European, knew the secret, though ; perhaps a 
little out of keeping with the broad and summary 
treatment of dresses and accessories ; the whole 
design recalls in its spaciousness and cool colour 
the effect of a fresco by Uccello. Yet more re- 
markable in its way is the anonymous lull length 
portrait of a lady [Plate II, a] from the Wegener 
collection. Here too we note the singular power 
of suggesting modelling within the outline of face 
and arms, while the bubtleties of painting in the 
dress and the form beneath it are worth close study. 
Before this lady, who puts down her book to enjoy 
a reverie, we have the intimate sense of a living 
presence, and feel that atmosphere of elegance and 


naturalness combined which in Europe we asso- 
ciate with the eighteenth century. Such portraits 
appear to be excessively rare, ^'ct finer in con- 
ception is the pathetic portraiture of an exiled em- 
peror in ragged clothes beside an o.x, also from the 
Wegener series (Exhibition No. 81). The wisdom 
and tenderness of old age could not be portrayed 
with more sympathetic dignity ; and the seeming 
simplicity of the brushwork is of an almost magical 
subtlety. This painting has been catalogued as of 
the Ming period, but appears to belong to the 
present dynasty, and is all the more notable on 
that account. But a number of other works in the 
collection prove what distinction and variety of 
powers the art of China could boast at a time 
when current theory has presumed it to be totally " 

Before leaving the Ming epoch we must note 
the splendid design and rich colour of the Tartar 
Huntsman [Plate HI, a] attributed to Ch'en Chii- 
Chung, and the imposing and formidable Tiger 
(Exhibition No. 61) signed by the same artist. Later 
in date, of the end of the Ming or beginning of 
the present dynasty, is a still grander example of 
animal painting, the Bear Siiiprised by an Eagle 
[Plate III, b]. These are all from the Wegener 
collection. The last is in monochrome, with a 
few touches of tawny brown, and astonishing in 
its combination of fine detail with robust design. 
If on a less imaginative level of conception than 
earlier work of the same type, it shows an added 
realism in the seizure of animal character, and 
illustrates the force of the naturalistic movement 
in China which gave its impulse to the Maruyama 
and Shijo schools of Japan. And here one may 
remark as an odd result of our present state of 
knowledge that while the eighteenth century 
masters of Japan who imitated Chinese contempo- 
raries or predecessors are famous, and their works 
prized and sought after, the Chinese whom they 
followed remain as yet unknown. Time no doubt 
will do them justice ; but so far we sadly lack the 
requisite information and material. A number of 
works in the Museum collection, only some of 
which could be exhibited — the Cock, Roses and 
Hydrangea, the Roses and Jasmine, the Falcon, and 
the Demon 0//f//tT (Exhibition Nos. 94, 97, 104, 107) 
all from the Wegener series, may be instanced — 
illustrate in a variety of styles the work of these 
masters. The Museum also possesses examples of 
the ' literary man's style,' which again was followed 
with such enthusiasm by Japanese painters like 
Taigado. These, though they are of interest to 
the student, can never be fully appreciated by 
Europeans. Both Chinese and Japanese often 
prize works of art for other than merely artistic 
reasons ; literary or personal association, for in- 
stance, will make them attach to certain paintings, 
regarded rather as the hand-writing of distinguished 
personages, an importance that is, from our point 

(a) tartar shooting turtle-doves 
by ch'en ciil-chung, ming dynasty 



Qhinese Paintings in the British Museum 

of view, extravagant. Conversely they will some- 
times despise works which we rightly admire. 

Let us never forget how the taste of Europe has 
changed in the matter of painting during the last 
century. Had it been possible for the Japanese 
to collect Italian pictures for their museums a 
hundred years ago, and had they bowed to the 
cultivated taste of Europe, they would have bought 
the Eclectics of the seventeenth century. Now 
that we have begun to take the art of the Far East 
seriously, and no longer treat the study of it as a 
branch of ethnography, there is a danger that we 
may pay undue deference to the native taste of 
the day. Already the superficial strangeness has 
worn off, and we know enough to understand at 
least something of the Oriental point of view, and 
the ideals which inspired their art, and we do 
not demand that their aims should conform to 
ours. But, after all, the only permanent standard 
is that which can be applied to the whole world's 
art ; and to have that art and its various achieve- 
ment in view is the best preparation for appre- 
ciating, on their own intrinsic merits, these works 
of Eastern Asia. Only those whose judgment of 
Western art is academic or capricious will be at a 
loss when confronted with what is really admirable 
in this new world of beauty. 

In concluding these brief notes, however, I 
would emphasize the fact that we are still at the 
beginning, so far as the scientific study of Chinese 
painting is concerned. No one really knows what 
still exists in China, and the study of Chinese 
private collections can alone complete our know- 


H E eighties of the last century 
was a period of new thoughts 
and new ideas in the develop- 
ment of French art. In other 
nations, too, this ferment was 
at work. In Germany there 
was uncompromising con- 
troversy concerning open-air 
painting ; while here it was not so much a question 
of the value of Impressionism as that the art of 
Bastien Lepage had become the central issue in 
the discussion. And in the meantime a new art- 
movement developed in France, a consequence of 
deduction from Impressionism, but one which in 
many ways might be said to be a denial of those 
principles. The other nations hesitated long 
before they established relations with this new art, 
which was represented by the names Cezanne, 
Seurat, Van Gogh and Gauguin. In Germany it 
became known for the first time towards the end 
of the nineties, at the same time that German 
1 Translated by H. C. Kerraby. 

ledge. We owe an enormous debt to the Japanese 
for making so many splendid works known to us 
in reproductions ; but when we come to examine 
questions of authorship we too often find that 
what is certainly known amounts to deplorably 
little : nor must we forget that Japanese con- 
noisseurs differ in their attributions no less widely 
than our connoisseurs of Italian art, as we have 
found in the case of the Museum collection. A 
careful consideration of all qualified criticism 
must go hand in hand with an unprejudiced study 
of the paintings themselves. 

Since our first article appeared, there has been 
published in the ' Kunstchronik ' of September 
2nd an article, by O. Kiimmel, on the Oriental 
paintings in the British Museum. This article is 
designed to convey the impression that the collec- 
tion consists almost entirely of worthless or fifth- 
rate productions, and has not the least representa- 
tive character. The fact that the Eaiihly Paradise 
is dismissed as not worth criticism or even men- 
tion, is significant of the method employed ; but 
the laborious determination to see nothing good 
in the London collection can but provoke a smile. 
Our studies can only profit by the disinterested 
criticism and co-operation of serious fellow- 
workers in this difficult and fascinating field. Such 
workers are not wanting among our colleagues 
in Germany ; and to their appreciation we prefer 
to leave a writer whose article contributes 
nothing of illumination to the subject, and whose 
modesty and manners seem on a level with his 

artists recognized the fundamental error by which 
the Impressionists had for so long been depreciated 
in favour of far weaker masters. In Belgium a 
speedy entry was found for the new artists, thanks 
to the Exposition des Vingt, and later to the Libre 
Esthetique. Holland declined absolutely to be 
won over to the new movement, and it is only very 
recently that their great compatriot. Van Gogh, 
has come under the notice of the Dutch. In 
the United States, where Impressionism had early 
taken root, the new art found no response, whereas 
in the last few years many pictures of this school 
have found their way to Russian collections, and 
many Russian painters have pressed forward 
along the road of the French Synthetists. In 
the Scandinavian countries interest was early 
aroused in Gauguin, whose wife was a Dane. 
This year an exhibition was held in Christiania 
of the works of Paul Gauguin selected from 
Scandinavian collections by M. Jens Thies, 
the Director of the Norwegian National Gallery. 
Hitherto, England has been quite untouched by 


Vincent van Gogh 

this art. Yet I believe tliat it ought to be all the 
more valued in England because it has developed 
an entirely new point of view in regard to deco- 
rative painting ; and England in decorative art 
has hitherto shown the best results, thanks to the 
open mind with which she has drawn stimulus for 
the solution of decorative problems from any and 
every source. It would, however, be doing a grave 
injustice to nickname this art ' decorative painting,' 
for though decorative problems play a prominent 
part in the pictures of this school, they are not the 
only ones. It is far more with the deepest problems 
of pictorial art in general that these painters are 
concerned ; they have broken new ground in the 
problem of colour by the division of tones as well 
as by attempting to attain a greater brilliance of 
illumination than the Impressionists ever did, by 
the building up of harmoniously related colour- 
planes. They approached the questions of com- 
position from a new standpoint by rejecting the 
easy routine, and by seeking inspiration in archaic 
and primitive art. They endeavoured to evolve 
new aspects of the classicist problem through a 
simplification of form which was not achieved by 
means of imitation of the later ancients after the 
manner of the French Academicals, but by a 
thorough study of the works of the Egyptians and 
of other ancient art. Yet they did not treat these 
works of ancient art merely as material for study, 
but rather as something living and actual, and by 
the very naivcle and unhistorical nature of their 
outlook upon the ancient works they preserved a 
freshness, a cleanliness of soul which prevented 
them from ever appearing traditional or old. This 
art is young and fresh in the fullest meaning of 
the words. 

I have already named the leading artists of 
this new synthetic art. Cezanne by chronology 
belongs to the group of the Impressionists. He 
was the only one among them from whom 
the sympathy of art-lovers was permanently 
withheld. His vigorous art, which is founded 
on a tireless conscientiousness in the study of 
form, colour and value, and in its fundamentals 
may be styled classical, seemed to the majority 
too rough, too tortured. It was only the later 
generation, when it came to understand the new 
art, which recognized that among all those who 
worked with him, Cezanne probably had penetrated 
most deeply into the mystery he sought to probe, 
that in delicate observation of the play of light 
and shade he is surpassed only by Chardin, and 
that he knew more completely than any of his 
contemporaries in France how to mould the 
meaning of a landscape to personal spiritual 

Seurat was the founder of Neo-Impresslonism. 
It grew out of Impressionism — only new techni- 
calities divide the two. Neo-Impressionism retains 
the principle of simple colour, avoiding the use of 

black and of brown tones, avoiding the mixture of 
complementary colours, and yet seeking after still 
more intense lighting by an arrangement of the 
single colour dots in a pattern of mosaic. Neo- 
Impressionism, which is represented now by 
Signac, H. E. Cross and Luce, was in its origins 
an analytical art ; yet Seurat and Signac were 
driven gradually by their particular technique 
towards synthesis. Seurat, who died young, sought 
to evolve a monumental style out of his impressions 
by reliance on Egyptian sculpture. This is best 
seen in his Vnc Aprcs, Midi a la Grand Jattc (now 
in the possession of M. Edmond Cousturier in 
Paris). Signac was drawn towards problems of 
light, and here Claude Lorrain and Turner were 
his greatest inspiration. 

Gauguin began with the impressionism of Pissaro. 
He possessed an active mind which speedily 
recognized the practical and positive side both of 
things and problems. The contact with Pissaro 
and even with Van Gogh (though he himself 
maintained the contrary with regard to Van Gogh) 
brought him also to ideas of synthesis. In his 
school-circle at Pont Aven he raised synthesis to 
a dogma and dreamed of nothing less than a 
complete transformation of the entire profession 
of art on this basis. 

Van Gogh is perhaps the deepest nature of this 
group of artists next to Cezanne. He had the 
greatest intuition, his works sprang from the 
emotion of a creative force full at once of pain 
and fire. He was entirely an Impressionist in his 
method and became a Synthetist without knowing 
it. He held apart from all Intellectualism and 
all cold construction ; he was fired by high ideals 
and he loved and toiled unceasingly and yet never 
lost hope. Therein perhaps was the first true 
consecration of his art. 

Vincent Van Gogh was brought up in an evan- 
gelical Protestant presbytery — a iiiilicti which has 
given many thinkers and many artists to the Teu- 
tonic countries. He was born on March 30, 1853, 
in Groot Zundert in Holland, of which his father 
was a pastor. The traditions of a presbytery drive 
the children as a rule towards philosophy, the 
doubting form of religion, or towards literature, 
mostly literature with a moral purpose. In the 
family of Van Gogh the tendency was towards 
sensuous beauty — towards painting. Yet between 
this new tendency and the old tiadition there was 
a conflict : Van Gogh wavered for a long time, 
asking himself whether art or a respectable em- 
ployment as a minister of religion or a teacher 
were his true vocation. It was not until he was 
thirty that he came finally to a decision. 

Feeling himself drawn to painting, yet lacking 
the courage to embark on the sea of production, 
he followed the example of his brother and turned 
to the art-trade. As a young man he entered the 
business of Goupil, and was employed both in The 






Hague and in Paris, in branch establishments of 
the firm. At that time he was already attracted 
by French painting, as his letters to his brother 
show. Even to his principals the young and un- 
conventional apprentice is said to have written 
long, enthusiastic letters which were put among 
the firm's papers and for the time being were 
stacked away as so much waste. The invaluable 
letters of Van Gogh to his brother and to Emile 
Bernard which have been in part published are 
among the most striking self-revelations of an 
artist ever known. We would give much to know 
the contents of those other letters of his in the 
years he spent as an art-dealer, but they are, I learn, 
lost beyond all possibility of recovery. 

After several years' experience in the trade. Van 
Gogh came to the conclusion that he had not yet 
found his true vocation : such contact with art as 
he had experienced in trade did not seem to him 
the right one. For his idea, which was shared by 
his brother, of supporting the Impressionists, then 
fighting for existence, found at the time no lasting 
reflexion in the firm of Goupil. Through these 
disillusionments he came to be doubtful of art. It 
seemed to him a thing set apart for the elect few, 
and, therefore, socially useless if not actually ob- 
jectionable. And so the traditional moral ideas of 
his upbringing surged uppermost in him ; he 
decided to carve out for himself a respectable 
position as a teacher, and gave up all his earlier 
plans. In 1876 he came to England as a teacher, 
but he found no firm foothold, and his plans were 
once more changed. In 1877 we find him study- 
ing theology in Amsterdam in order to adapt 
himself to the wishes of his family who hoped to 
see him settled on a career. 

The set, dry round of the official Protestantism 
of the University, however, also failed to satisfy 
him : he felt a call to undertake a wider, more 
humane crusade in his own way, and in 1878 he 
turned his steps towards Belgium, and worked in 
the raining district of Borinage as a missionary. 
His work met with no result among the rough 
mining population, and this led to a fresh moral 
catastrophe. Van Gogh, world-weary and dis- 
heartened, returned to his family at Etten in North 
Brabant, and there began drawing, more to pass 
the time than from any impulse towards creative 
work. In Borinage he had already made some 
experiments in drawing as we learn from his 

From 1 88 1 onwards he worked hard, and then 
sought out his brother-in-law. Mauve the painter, 
who gave him advice in technique without being 
able in any way to influence his artistic nature 
deeply. He soon parted from his teacher and 
worked his way alone, producing as his first works 

^Quoted by J. Maier-Graefe in his ' History of the Develop- 
ment of Modern Art,' to which work I am also indebted for the 
majority of the dates in this biographical note on Van Gogh 


Vincent van Gogh 

in oils Ealing Potatoes, The Coffee Stall, and Tlie 
Basket Maker. He spent a little while at the 
Antwerp Academy in 1885, but it was only a very 
brief stay and was not calculated to enrich his art 
in any way : the great event of his life was his 
advent in Paris in the winter of 1886 and his 
association with the men who were to be met 
there in the shop of Tanguy, an old picture dealer. 
He came to know Gauguin, Emile Bernard, 
Pissaro, Seurat and others, who were then striving 
after a higher form than Impressionism. But he 
was only able to stay about a year in Paris, for he 
could not find there the peace and quiet contact 
with Nature which he needed. All the same, that 
year gave him his most valuable artistic impulses 
and instruction. In the spring of ^iSSyJie-wejit- 
to Provence, hoping to find in the landscape there 
that happy colouring for which his colour-sense 
yearned. His next stopping place was Aries : he 
then worked for some time at the Saintes Maries in 
Crau on the Rhone delta and finally at Saint 
Remy, near Aries, where Gauguinjoined him iii- 
rSS^." -FeF-ar-letig time the two artists had had i 
in mind to work together, partly for the sake of 
mutual encouragement and partly to ease their 
worldly difficulties by a joint household. 

The attempt ended most unhappily. Van Gogh 
had overworked himself and was in a nervous and 
most excitable state. Gauguin may have hurt him 
by his imperious manner, and it is at least certain 
from his letters that he claimed to have shown 
Van Gogh the right road, whereas, in point of fact, 
it was Van Gogh who, while they were together, 
was the directing force. The two friends quarrelled 
violentfy, and Van Gogh in a frenzy threatened 
Gauguin with a razor. He was disarmed and 
Gauguin succeeded in quieting him. The next 
morning, however, he discovered that Van Gogh 
had obtained possession of the razor again and 
had cut off his own ear. The mental trouble 
which had threatened him for a long time had 
come to a head, and by his own desire he entered 
the asylum at Aries. 

Van Gogh during the time he was under treat- 
ment there must have lived in a strange world of 
dreams : a group of his most beautiful paintings 
belongs indeed to that very period — among them 
the exquisite view of the asylum in upright/onw^^ 
with the great pine trees. And though he re- 
covered his mental balance to some extent, he 
could never be left to live alone again, and his 
family therefore decided to put him in the care of 
Dr. Gachet at Auvers-sur-Oise. The doctor was 
a great lover of art and the best possible guardian 
for a sick and troubled spirit like Van Gogh. He 
continued to paint after he settled at Auvers in 
9, and the works of this period show hardly any 
in his artistic powers : in form they 
are far more simple than those of his days in 
Provence, in colour they are bolder, here and there 



i . 



Vincent van Gogh 

Ihcy give indications of a certain tendency towards 
symbolic representation. But it would be an in- 
justice to say that \'an Gogh in his last years was 
no longer cognisant of his artistic medium. Vo 
the end he had lucid intervals : lie understood ins 
fate clearly and may have known that the future 
would have held for him the utter darkness of 
complete insanity. He ; ought and found the way 
out: on July 28", 1890, he died by his own hand 
and lies bulled in Auvers. 

From the technical point of view Van Gogh 
went through many changes. He became a 
practising artist late in life after having worked for 
many years, as we have seen, in the art-trade. The 
painters who most influenced him in that period 
were next to the artists of his native country, 
Ziem',Dia7,, Monticelli, Millet and Delacroix. When 
finally he had decided to turn to painting as a pro- 
fession he did not attempt, as so many other lovers 
of art do when they take the dangerous step from 
theory to practice, to achieve at one stroke with 
an untutored hand all those dreams that come to 
a mind which lives in the realms of art. He went 
patiently and slowly to work. 

In order to recover from the mental and tempera- 
mental crises of the immediate past, he went into 
the country in search of solitude, and worked 
from the models that he found among the peasants 
in the fields. The long series of large charcoal 
drawings belongs to this period and is an eloquent 
testimony to the upright and honourable work of 
Van Gogh. To the same period the first attempts 
at painting belong, attempts which also present 
objects from the daily life around him. The best 
known of these works is The Potato Eaters. There 
is in this picture something painfully impassioned: 
one sees that the painter's powers of expression are 
still unequal to tlie task, and yet we have the in- 
stinctive feeling that there is here a great force, a 
areat passion. There are other pictures of that 
period technically more advanced than this maiden 
effort, even though they do not attain to the same 
passion of expression. Pictures like The Basket 
Maker, The Coffee Stall Keeper and certain portrait- 
studies (which are now in the collection of Frau 
Cohen Gosschalck) are pitched in a lower key, 
with dark green olive-brown and black blending 
into a full-toned gloomy harmony. Here we see 
Van Gogh following in the steps of Frans Hals. 
He endeavours to build up his picture with boldly- 
drawn broad strokes, but his brush is not guided 
by such a high-spirited temperament, as would 
show its happy rhythm in bold and insolent brush 
strokes : in these pictures there is far more some- 
thing gloomy and secretive straining for freedom 
from its fetters. . 

We have also some landscapes of that period, in 
which there is not much trace of influence from 
his brother-in-law and teacher Mauve. Mauve's 
pictures, of which the Municipal Art Gallery in 


The Hague possesses some beautiful examples, 
show him as an adroit, sensitive painter of land- 
scape, who drew so much that was charming and 
lovable from the traditions of art and the atmo- 
sphere of his native land without ever betraying 
to us from his own temperament anything either 
surprising or new. The landscapes of Van Gogh 
at that time (for example, among others the works 
in the museum at Rotterdam) are thoroughly 
uneven. It is evident that he was at war with his 
teacher. He seeks in these works to enliven a 
conventional 'Dutch' style of painting with a 
broader execution. At one time he uses broad 
strokes, at another strong stipple to bring move- 
ment and life into the work. Yet he cannot 
succeed in making a silk purse out of a sow's 


At length he found that with his longing for the 
new he could no longer remain in Holland. 
Instinct told him that there was no road for him 
either among the heavy colour-tones to which 
many of the painters of the country clung, or in 
the further development of the art of Frans Hals. 
Memories of the pictures he had seen in his trading 
days in Paris followed him : pictures by Ziem, 
Monticelli and Delacroix, the work of those who 
were then fiercely striving in the cause of Impres- 
sionism. So he burned his boats and sought in 
Paris that inspiration which should teach him to 
know himself. And little though Paris, as a city, 
suited the temperament of Van Gogh, it could 
instruct an artist who knew that he had not yet 
found his particular style. An unconscious instinct 
which we often call chance led him into the circle 
of the young painters who were seeking new roads 
and who were, temperamentally, his affinities. 

Van Gogh's work in Paris accounts for the 
changes which were preparing in his style of 
painting. Take, for example, the View of Paris 
from the top of Montmartre. The far distances 
melt into each other in a fine soft pearl-grey, as 
only the Dutch ever knew how to paint them. The 
execution is no longer so broad as in the pictures 
painted in Holland, the brush-stroke is not, it is 
true, softened down, but is nevertheless delicate : 
as a fresh colour-note, the red tones of the roofs 
and chimneys stand out from the grey harmony. 
At the beginning of the sixties Monet went to 
Holland and the pictures of that period show him 
at a similar point to Van Gogh in these Paris 
pictures. He revels in grey : this grey of the 
Dutch landscapes lifts him above a certain heavi- 
ness of tone in his earlier works. He discovers 
the atmosphere. Herein is the first evidence of 
the discoveries that were to come, Monet became 
oradually a colorist — as indeed the blue air of 
Paris is more coloured than the grey air of Holland. 
In a similar way Van Gogh's pictures show us an 
artist who sees the atmosphere of Paris, above all 
with Dutch eyes. But with a thought for the 

Impressionists, who by this time had won through 
to the ' joy of colour,' he recognizes that he too 
must tind the road to colour. 

Other Paris pictures such as the Restaurant cic 
la Sircne show his progressing along this road ; 
he uses primary colours, avoids the mixture of 
complementary tones, and sets the colours un- 
compromisingly next to one another ; one sees 
how he analyses the theories of the Impressionists, 
the groups around Seurat and Signac. Ultimately, 
when he had solved the problem, he speedily came 
to the conclusion that Paris, with its obvious 
limitations to inventiveness, was not the appropriate 
field of work for him. Albeit, Paris was the only 
city in the world that could at once rate an artist 
like Van Gogh at his true value ; a man like Van 
Gogh, to whom communion with Nature was an 
essential, could not find a lasting home in such a 
city. So he turned his steps to the South of 
France. There was a cogent logic behind this 
which drove him to select that part of the world 
rather than, for example, his native land. The 
teaching of Paris had brought him to the stage of 
clear lighting colour : Holland could not possibly 
give him the motives he needed. Furthermore the 
deep art of Cezanne had taken hold of him more 
than anything else in Paris : he realised that the 
forms of the southern landscapes with their clear- 
ness and simplicity would offer him the possibility 
of a synthesis that was denied him in the compli- 
cated and many-shadowed landscapes of the He 
de France. 

One might almost say that a miracle occurred 
as soon as Van Gogh arrived in Provence. In 
contact with Nature new forces awoke in him : at 
one blow almost, he found that style which should 
best express his perception of Nature. He held 
fast to the principle of the division of the tone, 
avoiding still the mixture of complementary tones 
as he had already done in Paris. Yet his brush 
stroke, which, in Paris, had become fine, almost 
dainty and irresolute through his uncertainty as to 
his whereabouts among the crowd of new ideas, 
became in Provence emphasized, and broader, 
heavier than ever it had been in Holland. Freed 
from the whirl of the city, Van Gogh found at 
once himself and his artistic style. From the 
moment of his arrival in Provence everything in 
its essentials is completed : he becomes thereafter 
broader, more emphatic in execution, but there 
are no more fundamental changes. 

His next efforts were towards an intensification 
of the colour-scale. He was especially enthusiastic 
about the strong bright yellow, and boldly made this 
tone, with strong orange and red as an accompani- 
ment, the dominant note of his pictures. This 
forceful note he balanced by a series of bluish 
complementary tones which heighten yet more 
the brilliance of the yellow. The details he put in 

Vincent van Gogh 

with big, thick strokes : one might almost say he 
worked like a carpenter with an axe, so that his 
pictures have in them something firmly built and 
monumental even though they spring directly 
from Nature. 

And yet the Dutchman is not lost even in these 
brilliantly coloured works. No matter how 
forceably the tones may strike one, they are always 
built up harmoniously, and it is particularly to be 
noted how scrupulously Van Gogh observed fine 
half-tones and half-shadows which one would not 
have expected him to be equal to in the heat of 
his work. Beside the strongest yellow we get 
softer, muted whitish-yellow tones which are 
frequently balanced by a bluish-grey. This fine 
contrast between chromatic muted yellow and 
brilliant blue-grey gives a very soft note which 
plays the part of an accompanying chord to "the 
leit-motif oi stronger tones. 

Van Gogh becomes a colour-symbolist when he 
finds himself confronted by a task that is not 
possible to accomplish along the lines of Nature. 
We have certain works especially belonging to his 
latest period in which he sought to represent the 
sun. He took the daring step of painting it as a 
brilliant yellow disc surrounded by orange, and 
out of it the flood of light streams down upon the 
landscape. We must not look upon this work as 
an attempt to reproduce Nature ; it is a paraphrase 
of Nature. 

An unsympathetic critic has opposed the later 
works of Van Gogh, those which belong to the 
period when he was in the asylum at Aries and at 
Auvers, on the ground that these pictures are 
evidence of an ill-balanced mind, and consequently 
cannot be taken into account in any judgment of 
his artistic value. I do not wish to be drawn into 
any psychiatric discussion as to how far it is 
possible for the unsound mind to continue work- 
ing along the lines followed in times of mental 
health. For myself I could not differentiate 
between the works of the sane and the insane 
Van Gogh. All the pictures of his later period 
appear to be a logical chain in a development 
which began with his arrival in Provence. We 
could hardly point to any pictures in which there 
IS a painful weakness, in which attempt and 
achievement do not match each other. It is, 
perhaps, possible that Van Gogh, if he had lived 
longer, would have entered on a period in which 
some such discrepancy would have become 
apparent. It seems to me that throughout his 
life he was always able to judge for himself the 
value of his artistic productions, and it seems 
unjust to regard even the last works of this artist 
with any reservations whatsoever that are not 
dictated by purely artistic considerations.' 

3 The illustr.itions to this article are from photographs taken by 
M. E. Druet, io8, Faubourg St. Honore, Paris. 




LTHOUGH tlie llK-rians, in 
common with the ancient 
Gauls, may have been expert 
weavers of cloth with striped 
iir chequered patterns, which 
was tlie prototype of the ' tar- 
tan ' mantles so common in 
the northern provinces of Spain 
at the present clay, we find no testimony to the 
excellence of the weaver's craft in the peninsula 
until nearly three hundred years after the Moorish 
occupation. The 'Chronicle of Rassis the Moor,' 
written about the end of the tenth century, states 
that within the walls of Almeria were many 
cunning weavers who produced in quantities mag- 
nificent silken cloths inwoven with gold. While 
Baeza was renowned for excellent cloths called 
hipetcs, Alicante was another centre for the pro- 
duction of woven fabrics. In the twelfth century, 
according to Edrizi the geographer, the carpets 
made at Chinchilla, in the province of Nueva, 
could not be imitated in any place ' dependent on 
air and water.' Ibn Said and Ash Shakandi 
bore evidence in the thirteenth century to the 
prosperity of the textile industries of Malaga, 
Almeria, and Murcia. A kind of carpet called 
'Tantili,' probably woven at Tantala, was exported 
to all countries of the east and west, and Murcia 
was also famous for the brightly coloured mats 
which the natives used for covering the walls of 
their houses. These are referred to in the inven- 
tory of the goods of Don Gonzalo Palomeque, 
Bishop of Cuenca in 1273. This document enu- 
merates Murcian fapetes, carpitas viadas from 
Tlemcen, etc' Such references might indeed be 
multiplied, for almost all the towns of Andalusia 
appear to have been famous for some kind of 
textile, if not for carpets. It was from Spain that 
carpets were first introduced into England. When 
the Spanish ambassadors arrived in London to 
negotiate the marriage of Elinor of Castile with 
Edward I, they hung silks and tapestries on the 
walls of their lodgings in the Temple, and even 
covered the floors with costly carpets. This 
luxurious display caused much sarcasm and abuse 
from the people of London. When Elinor arrived 
on the 17th October, 1255 (the King and Court, 
citizens and clergy going to meet her), and 
was conducted in state to Westminster through the 
city, it was hung with tapestry, and her lodgings 
were decorated with costly fabrics and carpets 
after the Spanish fashion.^ Considering the high 
esteem in which Spanish carpets were held at that 
period, it may be inferred that the carpets brought 
into England by the ambassadors were made in 
the peninsula. 
Existing specimens of Hispano-Moresque carpets 

' Leonard Williams, ' The Arts and Crafts of Older Spain,' 
Vol. iii, p. 5, 
2 Matthew Paris, pp. 782-3. 

are rare, and of these very few arc of earlier date 
than the end of the fifteenth century. The oldest 
at present known is probably the curious example 
preserved in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin 
[Plate II, d], but that it could be of the period 
claimed for it — from the thirteenth to the four- 
teenth century — is open to doubt, for this reason. 
Looking at all the known specimens of Spanish 
carpets ascertained, by heraldic evidence, to have 
been woven during the fifteenth century, it cannot 
be denied that their general appearance suggests an 
earlier date of manufacture — owing, in a great 
measure, to the archaic character of the detail. The 
composition generally consists of a geometrical 
ground-pattern of repeats of octagons, stars, rhom- 
boids, etc. To this geometrical basis have been 
added elements of the quaintest nature that could be 
imagined — grotesque human figures, elongated 
horses, birds, singly or in repeats, sometimes 
having their tails curved jauntily over their backs; 
and trees so extremely conventional in treatment 
that all semblance to Nature is lost. Besides being 
used in the field of the carpet, these are repeated 
in the border, even to the margin, sometimes 
filling up the spaces between the letters of a Kufic 
inscription, woven in the thin forms peculiar to 
the writings of Moorish Spain. The toy-like 
character of these elements, and their scattered 
distribution, suggest to the ordinary mind that 
the denizens of a Noah's Ark have been turned 
loose and left upon the carpet. By greatly magni- 
fying, elaborating and repeating one of these 
details so that it fills the field of the carpet, the 
efifect is more archaic still, and a composition 
similar to that of the 'Tree' carpet in the Kaiser 
Friedrich Museum is obtained [Plate II, c]. 
That remarkable specimen is incomplete towards 
the foot, but enough rernains to show the general 
effect.^ The long narrow panel is divided vertically 
by a slender rod-like stem, which is carried to the 
top, where it ends in a conventional leaf. From 
this stem spring, at right angles and at regular 
intervals, three slender horizontal pairs of branches. 
Upon the extremities of these are placed huge 
structures, half castles, half foliage, with pj'ramidal 
tops, being as a whole almost unintelligible, so 
extreme is the conventionality. Within these 
erections are little birds, stars, and other forms 
similar to those in carpets described later. The 
border consists of a blue band, containing the 
Kufic inscription, ' La ilah ill Allah' (There is no 
God but the God), many times repeated.' 

The splendid carpet illustrated here [Plate I, a], 
belonging to Mr. L. Harris, is in extreme contrast 
to the simple ' Tree ' carpet in its composition, 
which is very similar to that of a group of five 

•'The small scale on which it is alone possible to illustrate 
these carpets requires a description of their minute ornament. 

* Dr. Friedrich Sarre, ' Kunst und Kunsthandwerk,' 1907, 
P- SM. 


others to be mentioned later. It bears the coat- 
of-arms of the family of Henriquez, hereditary 
admirals, and was woven in the first half of the 
fifteenth century. A curious feature is the strip, 
representing hunting scenes, which is placed at 
the top and bottom. These are constructed from 
details used in the border proper, and show black 
and white savages carrying the small concave shield 
of the fifteenth century, respectively attacking wliite 
and black bears under a tree. The repetition of 
the tree at regular intervals recalls a similar 
feature in the long and narrow German tapestries 
of the fifteenth century. A narrow band with 
serrated edges separates the hunting strips from 
the border proper, which contains the Ivufic in- 
scription, ' La ilah ill Allah.' The vacant spaces are 
filled at the top and bottom with bears, diminutive 
heraldic lions, and birds, and at the sides with 
some most remarkable details — wild men hunting 
bears, lions, etc. ; a stag-hunt in which appear tiny 
lions rampant gardant, and three curious varieties 
of trees, one having horizontal branches with a 
crowd of little birds crowning the pyramidal 
foliage, while in another the whole foliage has the 
effect of a single large leaf. But by far the most 
noteworthy feature here is the appearance of a 
lady wearing a veritable crinoline — that, too, in the 
most advanced stage of its development, and 
richly ornamented as well. Curiously enough, 
the origin of the farthingale of Queen Elizabeth's 
time was attributed to the Peninsula in connexion 
with a scandal concerning a Spanish princess. Its 
Spanish origin is well contirmed by the derivation 
of the word from the Spanish veningado, through 
the French vcrdugale ; vcrdiigo, a rod or shoot 
of a tree, being Portuguese for the plait or fold of 
a dress also ; and further, by the appearance here 
in an early fifteenth-century carpet of ladies wear- 
ing unmistakable full-hooped skirts.^ Two ladies 
appear here on the left wearing farthingales as a 
riding-dress, mounted on camels (?), with an atten- 
dant standing at the bridles, and further down on 
the right, a third woman similarly dressed is riding 
alone. Inside the Kufic inscription is a second 
band having a well-known pattern repeated on a 
light ground with a lace-like effect. The free and 
easy spirit in which the weavers worked is shown 
in this band near the foot, where the pattern has 
been slightly altered, apparently for no other reason 
than pure fancy. There is a curious and grotesque 
treatment of the human figure near the middle of 
the field, where octagons in a diagonal row contain 
what appear to be lamps, from which spring a 

''The nrigin of that strange garment maybe of a much earlier 
period than our Western European evidence suggests, for the 
bronze figures unearthed at H.igia Triada, in Crete [Page 102, I] 
carry it back, although in a modified form, to the iifteentli 
century B.C. Nor does iti geographical range seem to have 
been limited, when we consider the remarkable likeness 
between the Elizabethan farthingale and the festal dress worn 
in Otahcitc at the time of its discovery. 

Hispano-Moresque Qarpets 

human head and arms or hands, while the feet 
protrude at the bottom. The octagons of the 
fourth row above contain birds' heads with 
similar accessories, and by comparing these with 
the fillings of the eighth row below, we find the 
origin of this strange lamplike form, in the boat- 
shape used there to represent the body of a bird. 
While some of these animate forms are stiff and 
grotesque, others, such as the bears, boars, doves, 
and to some extent the savage hunters, have the 
more natural presentation and effect of movement 
which we find in some phases of early Saracenic art. 

There is a little difference in style between the 
preceding example and a group of fine carpets 
woven about the year 1440. It comprises three 
fine specimens belonging to Mr. L. Harris, one of 
which is illustrated here [Plate I, b]. The 
second is somewhat similar in design, while the 
third, measuring about thirty feet in length, bears 
the arms of Henriquez with those of allied families 
upon a simple ground-pattern of fimbricated stars, 
like those appearing in the borders of Plate I, A, 
and Plate II, d. A fourth example, bearing 
different arms, found in a convent in Toledo, has 
found a permanent home in America. A fifth 
member of this group, though shorn of more than 
half its original length, is also decorated with 
Spanish armorial bearings, and is now exhibited 
in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin [Plate II, 
dJ. Its field is a simple geometrical pattern of 
' stepped ' lozenges in blue, red or brown, with an 
outline of blue or red according to the necessities 
of colour repetition, the interstices between the 
'steps' being filled with white beads or pearls. 
This shape is identical with a Coptic form [Page 
102, a], and is filled, for the greater part, with 
ornament of a cruciform character, closely resem- 
bling a detail found in carpets from the Southern 
Caucasus, designed so early as the fourteenth 
century [Page 102, c]. In the other examples the 
pattern is less simple — octagons and rhomboids — 
the alternate octagons being filled with the stars 
so common in the carpets of Asia Minor ; or of 
octagons, hexagons and connected lozenges, the 
hexagons being filled with stars. Round each 
carpet is a dark blue band with the same Kufic 
inscription, ' La ilah ill Allah,' repeated many 

In these carpets the representation of the human 
figure is squat and grotesque. It is rarely four 
heads in height and the enormous hands are nearly 
always uplifted, recalling the attitude of prayer in 
the early centuries of the Christian era. The 
costume appears to be the simple tunic worn by 
the Copts, or else a garment tightened under the 
armpits or at the waist, and spreading out in a 
very wide base. Two figures in the Kufic inscrip- 
tion of another carpet, not here illustrated, show 
both costumes, one being very like the Coptic dress 
[Page 102, d]. Near the middle of the field of the 


Hispano-Morcsque Qarpets 


IJ»«*^3( «.« s*^:» 

(a) hispaxo-moresque carpet, first half of 
xv century. in the possession of air. l. harris 




■ t 


p- lib m|r^V 



(B) ALCARA/. CAKl'tT, lll;M ll\Ll OF XVI 




carpet [Plate I, b] an extremely interesting 
filling occurs. It represents a figure, in the attitude 
of prayer, standing in front of the doorway of a 
house or temple, which has on either side a 
smaller edifice with square windows and roof of 
azitkjas. In front is a zigzag line probably intended 
to represent water, which lends to the whole the 
suggestion of Noah and the Ark. The quadrupeds 
are easy to identify. The horse depicted with 
flowing mane and tail always has his rider seated 
on his back, but never showing in front. An 
elongated animal with a rope-like tail, generally 
accompanied by a small dog, placed in the 
vacant space above its back, is probably an ox. 
The dog is distinguished by his tail curled over 
his back in a spiral. The lion is represented 
rampant-gardant in the Kufic border [Plate I, B] 
and in the field of the carpet. There, too, occurs 
a curious filling of two bears or elephants repeated 
back to back. These beasts generally show a 
stronger western influence than is apparent in 
the human figures ; in some cases the forms 
approach very near to the elongated stags of the 
Scandinavian carpets. The dove is shown with 
displayed wings in a way which recalls the 
symbol of the Holy Spirit, while occasionally 
two tiny birds are placed over its wings. It is not 
so subject to repetition as some of the other birds, 
notably the little cocks and ducks, which occur in 
repeats of two in the manner of the Coptic symbol 
of the eternal principle of life, or in fours, sixes and 
even larger numbers ; one square in the border 
of the Berlin carpet containing no less than thirty- 
six little ducks. The peacock is distinguished by 
the treatment of the * eyes ' in his tail-feathers, 
which are represented by rings. A Coptic fragment 
shows the same treatment in the crest of a bird 
[Page 102, e] (perhaps the hoopoe of Solomon), 
while a fine example of the same method is seen 
in the peacock from a Saracenic fabric of the 
twelfth century [PAGE 102, F]. It occurs, too, in 
the decoration of the Capella Palatina, Palermo. 
Another type has a conspicuous crest and tail of 
pyramidal form, while both have clumsy boat-like 
bodies, sometimes ornamented with lines or spots. 
The inanimate forms are many and wonder- 
ful, comprising jewels with many settings ; rays ; 
conventional clouds ; hooks ; water-lines and 
spirals ; many symbolic, like the last, which 
Mariette says, were held by the Egyptians to repre- 
sent the wanderings of the soul in the world to 
come. There are also many varieties of the Cauca- 
sian star, so prominent in the eastern carpets, 
and of the half-rhomboid, filled with ornament in 
lines parallel to its sides, sometimes with the effect 
of marbling or of agate. A curious rendering 
of a chalice, or simple cup, is given near the 
middle of the top border [Plate II, d]. Its 
appearance generally is more suggestive of a 
candlestick, and it is often repeated in fours in the 

Hispano- Moresque £arpet5 

form of a cross. The sacred tree shown there is 
a rudimentary form of the free in the 'Tree' 
carpet at Berlin [Plate II, cj. In the middle of 
the border in the left-hand corner is a kind of 
trident, really a conventional tree-stem, but un- 
recognizable as such by itself. But turn to carpet 
[Plate I, b], where, in the left of the field, about 
three-quarters from the top, the same form makes 
its appearance as two tridents with a common 
shaft, while four little ducks are placed above the 
points of the lower. The same form occurs again 
in a more complete state in the middle of the band 
containing the Kufic inscription, which has been 
interrupted to allow space for it. The trident has 
grown more slender, and upon Ihe extremity of 
its horizontal arms are placed triangular leaves. 
Another row of horizontal branches, with more 
elaborate leaf-forms, birds, etc., is alone wanting 
to complete its similarity to the ' Tree.' It may 
be of interest to note in connexion with this 
trident-tree that the instrument we portray now in 
the hands of Poseidon is a development of the 
original sacred tree. In this carpet the change 
is completed ; the tree has become a trident. 
This may have been due to Coptic influence, since 
part of the lower trident-form is shown in the 
lower branch of a Coptic tree [PAGE 102, b]. 

The borders of this group of carpets are very 
broad ; that of the Berlin specimen occupies two- 
thirds of the entire width. It is composed of 
numerous bands of ornament. Reading from the 
inside : red stars on a white ground, with blue 
lines repeating the outline ; a band of quatrefoils, 
alternately red, white and buff; a band of zig-zags in 
red, blue, yellow, brown and white (a familiar feature 
in Coptic textiles) [PAGE 102, h] ; a broad band 
divided into rectangular spaces containing human 
figures ; a band wdth triangular spots of colour, 
and a dark blue band with the already-mentioned 
Kufic inscription, in white, with animals and other 
objects filling the vacant spaces. The border of 
[Plate I, b] is slightly different. It contains a 
band cut up into lozenges ornamented with 
swasticas and simple fillings that resemble the ace 
and five of diamonds. Beyond the Kufic inscrip- 
tion is a narrow money pattern (as in the ' Tree ' 
and other carpets), outside of which is the 
selvage. Upon this, at fairly regular intervals, but 
crowded closely at the narrow ends, are the pea- 
cocks, jewels, and other forms used in the field 
on a larger scale. 

These carpets are knotted in coloured wools on 
woollen warps. In the Berlin specimen the colours 
are few — viz., greenish white, light yellow, buff, 
brick- red, deep blue and warm brown. 

Taken as a whole, these carpets are frankly 
Saracenic, with animal forms of a western type. 

The human figures show strong Coptic influence, 
which is evident to a greater degree in the bird- 
forms. The powerful influence of the Copts on 


Hispafio - Moresque £arpets 

Saracenic art generally is acknowledged. That 
influence is so apparent, not only in these early 
carpets bnt in later examples, that the question 
arises — whether the weavers could have been Copts 
or the descendants of Copts, who were hereditary 
weavers ? The question which seems extravagant 
in connexion with carpets of the fifteenth century 
is reasonable if applied to textiles of the eleventh 
or twelfth centuries, and that is not too early a date 
for some of the details in the existing carpets. 
There is no doubt about the presence of Copts in 
Spain in the tenth century, where they could prac- 
tise their cult in peace under similar conditions to 
those imposed upon the Jews, but later, unlike the 
Jews, they would seem to have been absorbed into 
the ruling race." 

The most famous carpet manufactory in Spain 
was situated at Alcaraz in Murcia, though carpets 
of Letur and Baeza also are mentioned in inven- 
tories. There is a tradition among the Spanish 
weavers at the present day that the Alcaraz manu- 
factory was of Moorish origin, and that in later 
times Moorish slaves carried on the work under 
Christian rule. Be that as it may — and there are 
no grounds for doubting it — the manufactory must 
have existed until the middle of the sixteenth 
century. Amongst the effects belonging to the 
Emperor Charles V when he died at Yuste, in 
1558, were four Turkey carpets and four of 
Alcaraz.' In 1575, Philip II presented to the 
monastery of the Escuria two tapestries of 
Alcaraz of blue and yellow colours — Dos aljomhras 
de laiia dc Alcaraz de amarillo y mas ainarillo y 
azul, and a carpet of green marked out with yellow 
is also mentioned. Again three carpets of Alcaraz 
are mentioned in 1586. Trcs alfonihras de las ds 
Alcaraz dc hum fiiia de divcrsos colorcs a uiodo dc 
jaspeado? A certain type of extant Hispano- 
Moresque carpets bears such a close resemblance 
to those cited above that it has been generally 
attributed to the manufactory of Alcaraz. The 
colour, as described in the inventories, is a com- 
plete contrast to that of the earlier carpets, while 
certain details in these are repeated in the earliest 
known specimen of the ' Alcaraz ' style. 

^ The Copts are cited as one of the lowest classes of the 
population in a letter written by Abderrahman the Third, Kalif 
of Cordova, to Alnned-ibn-Ishac, one of his generals, whose 
feeble prosecution of the siege ol Saragossa excited the Kalif's 
wrath. While his anger was yet hot the Kalif received from 
the offender a polite request that he be appointed successor to 
the Kalifate. The vituperation of Abderrahman's reply has 
seldom been excelled : ' Hast thou forgotten that at Seville 
thou wast but a donkey merchant ? Was thy mother not the 
sorceress Handounan ? Thy father, was he not a simple soldier ? 
One might well apply the well-known verses to thee and thy 
family. You are plebeians, you, and linen cannot compare 
with silk. If you are Koreishites, as you claim, then take your 
wives from that illustrious tribe, but if, on the contrary, you 
are Copts, your pretensions are perfectly ridiculous.' Dozy, 
' Histoire des Musulmans d'Espagne,' Vol. iii, pp. 55-7. 

' Sir William Stirling-Maxwell, ' The Cloister Life of Charles 
the Fifth,' 2nd ed., Appendix. 

*Dr. Friedrich Sarre, ' Kunst und Kunsthandwerk,' 1907, 
P- 525- 


The fine carpet here reproduced in colours 
[Plate] is in the possession of Messrs. Lenygon 
and Co., and was acquired in Toledo, where it was 
used on the steps of tiie altar in a convent chapel. 
It was woven at Alcaraz, in the beginning of the 
sixteenth century. The leaf-form containing a 
bird placed in the centre of the simple repeating 
pattern which occupies the field, affords an inte- 
resting comparison with the mirror-shaped leaves 
in Coptic textiles [Page 102, l], which in some in- 
stances also contain birds; while the bird itself is 
of exactly the same form as those in any of the 
earlier Spanish carpets already described. It thus 
forms a useful link. It will be observed that the 
two leaves with wavy edges which flank the central 
form are inore characteristic of Hispano-Moresque 
art, but the lotus flowers above are at once remi- 
niscent of ancient Egypt. Lower down leaves are 
shown in profile, and there, perhaps, occurs the 
only evidence of Ixlenaissance spirit in this carpet, 
for from these leaves depend foliations which in 
repetition take the form of a swag, with florets of 
four and five petals, to the outside and inside. 
The whole springs from a conventional vase. 
With the exception of the swag, which remains 
green, all the elements of the design are subject 
to changes of colour in repetition. Outside the 
field are two narrow strips of white bordered with 
blue, enclosing a yellow band ornamented with 
quatrefoils of green outlined with white. The 
border is a repeating pattern of dragons placed 
back to back on a yellow ground of a deeper tint 
than that of the carpet proper. 

The carpet measures about 20 feet long by 9 in 
breadth, the upright warps numbering 16 in the 
space of one inch. The horizontal cords are com- 
posed of two or three fine strings, while the whole 
with the wools is woven firmly almost to hardness. 
In this carpet ten colours are used, viz., deep 
daffodil-yellow, buff, orange, warm brownish grey, 
pinkish grey, white, green, two blues (the lighter 
being used solely to break up the mass of the 
darker), and red, which is used only once, and then 
in an erratic manner. Near the bottom of the 
repeating pattern to the left of the field is a broken 
horizontal line of red, which is of no use as an 
element of design. It has been said in regard to 
similar instances of this irregularity that it was 
intended as a charm to ward off the evil eye ; also 
that if anything were made perfect the author of 
all evil might fly away with it. 

There is a strong general resemblance between 
Messrs. Lenygon's carpet and the Alcaraz carpet 
in the Victoria and Albert Museum [Plate II, b]. 
While the same dyes have been used, the Museum 
carpet is less vigorous in design, and of later date. 
The field consists of ovals formed by dark blue 
bands and ornamented with floral forms. The 
foliage consists of masses of dark blue, green, and 
yellow, which is of the same tone as the ground 


i^' - ■ *■ 

z ^ 
y. - 



but detached from it by a white outHne. The 
border is of the same yellow, and on it is a pattern 
of blue bands suggestive of dragon's bodies ; six 
colours only are used, as compared with the ten of 
Messrs. Lenygon's carpet — viz., yellow, warmer 
yellow, dark blue, green, grey, and white, which is 
used in outline only. 

A still later type of the Alcaraz carpet, woven 
about the middle of the sixteenth century, is pre- 
served in the Kunstgewerbe Museum, Berlin. The 
pattern is formed by thick stems, bursting into 
leaves and small flowers, and forming ovals in 
which are larger flowers, and ribbons, a fair copy 
of a Saracenic silk design. The border, however, 
composed of dragons, but here supporting a vase, 
is distinctly European in character. 

In strong contrast to the light Alcaraz textiles is 
the 'lion' carpet in the Victoria and Albert Museum 
[Plate II, a]. The whole design, the cone spring- 
ing from the floral stem with the lion rampant 
on either side ; the shield in the base with a chevron 
device; the stems springing from the sides and 
uniting at the top where they break into leaves ; even 
to the chevron on the shield is a faithful copy of a 
Hispano-Moresque silk of the fifteenth century in 
the same museum [PAGE 102, k]. Outside the field 
runs a narrow green strip with ornament similar 
to the Coptic border [Page 102, Jj and beyond this 
is the border proper, consisting of dragons bound 
together. On the outside the Coptic strip is re- 

Hispano- Moresque Qarpets 

peated. The colours of this carpet are very few, 
viz., yellow for the lions and dragon-border, light 
cherry-red for the ornament, dark green for the 
ground and a lighter green for the ornament in 
the Coptic strips. 

This Coptic strip is again evident in a diaper 
carpet of the sixteenth century in the same museum 
(No. 131, 1905), but there it is executed in brown 
and white. The diaper has been taken from some 
Italian textile of the fifteenth century, but there is 
something utterly unlike Italian design in the intense 
angularity of all the pattern, an angularity due to 
the spirit of the weaver rather than to the neces- 
sities of his craft. At the top and bottom there are 
placed broad bands of ornamented squares, which 
repeat another Coptic pattern [Page 102, o], and 
beyond this is a selvage showing characteristic 
Saracenic ornament. This use of the selvage is 
significant, as it occurs in PLATE I, B. This 
vigorous Saracenic treatment of a European pat- 
tern is no longer found in another diaper carpet 
in the Victoria and Albert Museum (No. 961, 1907), 
which shows tamer treatment throughout. Yet 
there is a link between them in the colours, the 
same deep green and light cherry-red. This last 
carpet also has a dragon border of a debased 
type, in striking to that of Messrs. 
Lenygon's example, which seems imbued with 
the intensity and fierceness of the Moors of 


INCE the publication of my 
llast article on ' Sheffield Plate' ^ 
[there has come to light an extra- 
ordinary mark of the Imitation 
Silver Mark Period. It appears 
on a coffee-pot in the workman- 
^ship of which the hand of the 
_ /coppersmith is evident, for it was 

from among those craftsmen that the early Sheffield 
Platers were recruited. To judge from both work- 
manship and design the pot might with fair accuracy 
be dated about 1750. The mark itself is under the 
foot, arranged in a straight line as here shown, and 
was struck by punches. 


A. SJa '^ ^ ^ on a coffee-pot, 
civc. 1750, in my possession. 

Here indeed is a mark which may be styled 
an ' Imitation Silver Mark' : its use must have 
been a daring procedure on the part of the 
early maker. As can readily be seen such 
Marks constitute a kind of fictitious Hall- 

1 Burlington Magazine, Vol. xv, p. 345 (September, 1909). 

Mark, entirely different from any of those 
shown as 'Imitation Silver Marks' in my 
work on ' Sheffield Plate,' - which consist of 
only one device repeated three or four times, 
and placed in the same position as the Hall- 
mark on similar articles in silver. Here 
follow two such marks, which have not pre- 
viously been published. 

B. ^^ 

C. ^ 

The Registered Mark Period of Sheffield Plate 
can be dated fairly accurately from 1780 to 1800. 

During a periocl of eleven years (1783 to 1784) 
no marks appeared on plated wares, since at this 
time their marking was forbidden by law, under 
the heavy penalty of ' transportation to some of 
His Majesty's colonies or plantations of America 
for the term of fourteen years ' : — to quote from 
the Act itself (Geo. Ill, cap. 52, s. 13). It appears 
that prior to this date certain makers had been 
placing marks upon their wares in the same position 

-' Sheffield Plate: its History, Manufacture and Art,' by 
Henry Newton Veitch, Chapter xxii, page 267. 


Sheffield Plate : the Period of Registered Marks 

as tlie Hall-mark would be placed on solid silver, 
in much the same way as a porcelain-maiuifactuier 
may imitate a mark on oriental china, thus m;dving 
a plated piece appear to be silver. It can hardly 
be said that such methods were fraudulent, yet 
they undoubtedly led to misconceptions, and the 
goldsmiths of London were able to take advantage 
of this when in 1773 the towns of Shefiield and 
Birmingham applied to Parliament for the estab- 
lishment of local Assay Offices. The London 
goldsmiths argued thus : — 

. . . . ' And upon the new plated wares made in 
Sheffield were placed marks in the same position 
as the hall-marks on solid silver ; these phited 
articles moreover were so well-made as to deceive 
the uninitiated into purchasing them as silver, the 
marks as a matter of course assisting the delusion.' 
(See mark A, a striking example of the London 
goldsmiths'^ ground of protest 1) 

To this the Sheffield makers replied that all 
their plated goods were sold as plated : they sug- 
gested also that the London authorities could not 
come into court with clean hands, since articles 
were frequently passed through the Assay which 
did not come up to the legal standard for silver. 
In spite of these mutual recriminations the Bill 
establishing the Assay Offices in both provincial 
towns was passed ; yet the Londoners so far pre- 
vailed that the marking of plated goods was at the 
same time forbidden by law as quoted above. 

Considerable jealousy existed regarding the two 
new ' silversmith ' towns ; the manufacture of 
plated wares in Sheffield and Birmingham having 
led to an increased output of solid silver which 
had hitherto been almost entirely monopolised by 
London. Moreover the platers cheapened the 
methods of manufacture, and it is no insignificant 
fact that the invention of Sheffield Plate consider- 
ably altered those methods. 

In 1784 an amendment of 'The Plated Wares 
Act ' allowed the use of marks under certain 
conditions : thus, every plater within one hundred 
miles of the town of Sheffield, must register a 
mark, consisting of his name and a device, at the 
Sheffield Assay Office, whether he wished to mark 
his wares or not. Of such a mark the best 
description is offered in the exact words of the 
Act of 1784, which read as follows : 

' That it shall be lawful for any manufacturer of 
goods plated with silver within the said town of 
Sheffield or within one hundred miles thereof, to 
strike, or cause to be struck, upon any metal vessel 
or thing plated or covered with silver, his or her 
surname, or in case of any partnership, the name 
or firm of such partnership, and also some mark, 
figure or device to be struck at the end of such 
surname or other name or firm, provided neverthe- 
less that every such surname or name of firm as 
aforesaid shall be in plain and legible characters 

^Ibid., p. 16. 

and struck with one punch only (to prevent any 
semblance of a Hall Mark), ' and every such 
mark' (Mote. 'Mark,' not ' punch '), figure or 
device shall, before the same be made use of, be 
submitted to the examination of the said Company 
of Guardians of the said Sheffield Assay Office 
and be approved of by them at some of their 
public meetings and registered in a book to be 
kept for the purpose.' 

Five hitherto unpublished examples of these 
Registered Marks are here given : 


THO!iiiw&cff Thomas Law and Co.; device, 
a squat vase; on a dish-lifter (?), ciix. 1790 ; 
Mr. Bernard Harrison's collection. (Previous 
examples of this mark had the name and 
device enclosed in a block, and there seems 
no trace of its registration in this form, while 
the one actually registered is again different 
from any other which I have found.) 

Emssa^^ , Morton and Co. ; device, a cock ; 
on a salver, circ. 1790 ; in Mr. P. F. Morton's 
collection. (This example is enclosed in a 
block : the only difference from any previously 
published, being that here the outline follows 
the shape of the device, an alteration from the 
original. A double impression was evidently 
struck in error.) 

fe^^^tft'^tfii?^ Daniel, Holy, Parker and Co. : 
Device, a pineapple, on a candelabra circ. 1805; 
in my possession. Re-registered in 1804, on 
account of an alteration in the name of this 
famous firm. 

ffi^SSQ. s. C. Younge and Co. : Device, 
a mitre, on a salver, circ. 1815 ; in Mr. Bernard 
Harrison's collection. A mark late in use, 
registered in 1813. 

Silk: Device, a lyre, on a fish-slice, circ. 
1810; in the possession of Messrs. Thomas. 
One of the few examples found, belonging to 
a Birmingham firm. Registered in 1809. 

It should be particularly noted that it was the 
mark only which must be registered, not the ptnicli: 
thus platers who did not desire to mark their 
goods, or those who made small articles ' in the 
toy way,' not large enough for marking, such as 
buckles and buttons, as also those who plated on 
steel and iron, were obliged to register a mark, 
though they never used it. The wording of this 
Act with regard to the radius of one hundred miles 
from Sheffield cannot but cause surprise ; it is al- 
most incredible that the Birmingham authorities 
allowed such a measure to pass, since it compelled 

I 12 




Sheffield Plate : the Period of Registered Marks 

the platers of their town to register their marks 
at the Sheffield Assay Office. Possibly Birming- 
ham at the time evinced no particular desire 
to mark her plated wares, thus Sheffield, while 
the sister-town did not realise the meaning of 
the new Act, had succeeded in getting fixed by 
law a radius large enough to include Birming- 
ham. Possibly again, Sheffield being the pioneer 
of the new Assay Offices, exacted this clause of 
Birmingham as a recompense. In any case the 
Yorkshire town continually fined those Birming- 
ham makers who omitted to register a legal mark 
until the year 1824, when a petition against this 
apparent injustice was sent up to Parliament. 
This was eventually withdrawn owing to the 
opposition and influence of Sheffield ; but ever 
afterwards the Birmingham platers considered 
themselves vmder no further obligation to abide 
by the law, and the Registered Mark on plated 
wares fell into total disuse not only in Birmingham, 
but before long in Sheffield also. 

This, in a few words, is the history of the ' Regis- 
tered Mark ' : and strangely enough, we have also 
a period of Sheffield Plate immediately associated 
with it, both in design and workmanship, extending 
from about 1780 to 1800. These dates are only 
approximately given as far as the period is con- 
cerned, and apply to the Sheffield Plate made from 
1780 (just prior to the second 'Plated Wares Act') 
down to 1800, when a device only, without the 
surname, began to be used as a mark. It is not 
possible to explain clearly why the use of a device 
only was permitted ; it was distinctly contrary to 
law, but the reasons for its use are obvious : a 
shopkeeper did not care to sell goods which re- 
vealed their actual maker, and since the punch 
was ordered to be made in one piece, it must at 
the very lowest estimate be half an inch long. A 
punch of this length could not be used to mark 
goods of certain shapes without doing considerable 
damage ; thus those makers who still desired to 
mark their productions began to use their device 
only, a practice which met both difficulties. The 
first use of marks consisting of a device only 
may be traced to the early part of the nineteenth 

To return to the Registered Mark Period : as 
already mentioned, pieces made during this period 
are of a certain character, and can always be asso- 
ciated with the registered mark, hence the name. 
It was at this very time that the workmanship of 
Sheffield Plate had so wonderfully improved that 
certainly, but for the mark, it might well pass as 
solid silver. (See above : 'Complaint of London 
Goldsmiths.') The early crudeness had disap- 
peared, as had the ' coppersmith ' methods so 
apparent in the ' Imitation Silver-mark Period,' 
though it must be admitted that these methods are 
not entirely lost until the Device Mark Period is 

At this time the manufacture was passing 
through an era when art in England had reached 
a high standard of excellence in almost every 
sphere ; the Sheffield-plater, following the prevalent 
designs, produced wonderful work, which remains 
perpetually pleasing to the eye. The improvement 
in workmanship may be largely attributed to the in- 
troduction of dies ; in the making of Sheffield Plate 
no part can be cast, as is possible in the case of solid 
silver ; the sheet, or plate, of prepared metal, 
technically called at the period ' Copper-plate,' 
must be ' raised ' — to use the correct term — into 
the shape required. During the Imitation Silver 
Mark Period this was principally done by hand ; 
but it was discovered by Hancock (apprentice to 
the inventor Bolsover) that dies could be made of 
great assistance, and a great improvement, in the 
manufacture. By the aid of dies separate parts 
could be made more accurately than by hand, and 
the whole fitted together more easily, a process 
very necessary in the making up of copper-plate, a 
fragile material of which the surfaces only were 
covered with silver — possibly even one surface 
only, according as the intended article required to 
be double or single-plated. The collector might 
with advantage remember this : it should be of 
great service in detecting forged or re-plated pieces, 
since thesilver being upon the surface only, the bare 
edges perforce must be concealed. To cover the 
latter successfully was the craftsman's perpetual 
desire, and it is only by studying his methods 
that the manufacture of Sheffield Plate can be 
thoroughly understood. 

Consider the group of candlesticks here illus- 
trated : [PL.-iTE I, a] the first square example is 
probably the earliest of these, and may be placed 
at about 1780 ; the small oval specimen is the 
latest type in the group, about 1800. The second 
square one is probably about ten years later than its 
companion ; note the very unusual pierced nozzle. 
The two small square candlesticks are probably of 
the same date as are the candelabra and the circular 
candlestick. Almost every example in this group 
is entirely made from dies, with the exception of 
the branches of the candelabra which are of 
octagonal wire. There are no silver mounts on 
these candlesticks, the whole being made from 

The next illustration [b] consists of a group of six 
examples almost entirely composed of wire work, 
all of which may, with fair accuracy, be dated as 
about 1800, with the possible exception of the 
potato-ring, which is apparently some ten years 
earlier. Every piece in this group shows a 
different type of wire ; and almost every conceiv- 
able shape and type of wire appears to have been 
manufactured by the Sheffield Plater, who excelled 
in this branch of his work. And truly great must 
have been the skill required not only to make the 
wire, but to work it up into these baskets, whose 


Sheffield Plate : the Period of 

merit and beauty are undeniable. Perhaps the 
one exception is the punch-bowl stand (miscalled 
' potato-ring'), which exhibits some of the charac- 
teristics of Irisli workmanship. It is always possible 
also to recognise a Scottish example of SheOield 
Plate by the work displayed upon it ; the English 
manufacturer attained a precision and lineness 
never exhibited in those specimens made in the 
sister countries. 

In the group of five coasters [c] the earliest is 
the centre one in the bottom row, dating from the 
beginning of the period, 1780. The next in age is 
at the right hand of the same row, made a few years 
later ; the others are of about the same date, 1790. 
The piercing on the two earliest specimens is 
handwork ; that on the other examples shows the 
use of tools. 

On Plate II [a] appear seven mustard-pots. All 
these may be said to have been made within 
twenty years of each other, the latest being the 
unpierced specimen, the earliest that decorated 
with the ram's-head medallions and festoons. All 
the apparently engraved work on these, and on the 
coasters described above, is not really engraving, 
but flat-chasing : i.e., the design is indented, not 
cut ; since to cut, as was usual on contemporary 
silver, would inevitably lay bare the copper. The 
piercing shows a combined use of tool and hand- 

In the illustration [b] are shown two contem- 
porary oval salvers, an example of the much- 
respected vase-shaped jug of which we see to-day 
so many copies — a caddy (one of a pair), a taper- 
stick, a pierced and flat-chased kidney-shaped cruet 
stand, the back portion of which is raised to form a 
handle, with, finally, a boat-shaped ink. All of 
these are made almost entirely of copper-plate, 
and may be dated at just before 1800. 

In considering the group of Argyles [c] (three of 
which are almost identical in design with the cup 
described below, and made in a similar manner), 
it may be observed that these are all of about the 
same date— 1790 ; the large one shows a slight 
difference of workmanship, having a silver reeded 
band round the shoulder. On the three vase- 

Reqistered A^arks 


shaped examples a little piece of silver has been 
added to cover the bare copper edges of the 
spouts ; this shows with some degree of clearness 
the beginning of the use of silver on the angles 
and edges. A little silver also appears on the rim 
and foot of these same specimens ; these mounts 
are peculiar to pieces of Shettield Plate made 
about 1790, and are described in my recent book 
as 'Transition Period,' though they might be 
more readily classed under the ' Registered Mark 
Period,' because marked pieces of this type are 
occasionally found bearing a Registered Mark, and 
these are hardly to be associated with the Device 
Mark Period. This method is used on the large 
oval salver [Plate II b]. 

Another method closely allied is the use of a 
silver bright-engraved band applied in a similar 
manner, and so placed as best suited to the design. 
Occasionally also a silver shield is added to take the 
engraving of a monogram or coat-of-arms without 
exposing the copper. From this stage we are led 
to the 'coat-of-arms shield,' like a clever 'patch' 
let in to the full depth of the copper-plate, this 
method, in its turn, being a forerunner of the 
much-admired process prevailing during the 
Device Mark Period, when the shield of silver 
was beaten in level with the surface. It is evident 
that the ' patch ' was not found satisfactory, as the 
join is usually found entirely covered with orna- 
mental engraving. 

In the cup and cover (circa 1785) [d] — an excel- 
lent specimen of raised work, the design of which 
is peculiarly characteristic of the period — the body 
is raised with the aid of one seam ; the foot and 
cover are probably die-struck, as are also the 
handles and knob. The inside is fire-gilt. Cups 
and covers in Old Sheffield are remarkably rare. 
The workmanship of this specimen is excellent, 
leaving nothing to be desired, and showing the 
progress of the plater's work. 

To sum up : in assigning a piece of Sheffield 
Plate to the Registered Mark Period, it must be 
understood that such a piece, if marked, would bear 
a Registered Mark, though, as is generally known, 
a marked piece of the period is seldom found. 



The curiously modern look of this, the last etched 
plate bearing Rembrandt's signature, has often been 
noticed ; indeed the print might easily be mistaken 
at a little distance for the work of some brilliant 
etcher of our own age. This impression would 
not have been so strong — indeed, we might not 
have felt it at all — if the model had been one of 
the homely, clumsy Dutchwomen whom the master 
commonly studied. The plate in that case would 
have grouped itself readily and inevitably with 


other plates of the same period such as the Woman 
near a Dutch Stove (B 197) and the Woman Batliiiig 
(B 200), and not with nineteenth-century France 
or England. The Recumbent Negress {B 20^1) has 
something of the same effect. 

The impression of modernity, and therewith of 
difference from the remainder of Rembrandt's 
etched work, which these plates leave, is due far 
more to the types of model employed than to any 
peculiarity of vision or treatment. In the Woman 
ivith the Arroiv the sitter has the slender frame, 
small waist and shapely oval head of the models 

who sit to-day in the studios of London and 
Paris. A Frenciiman perhaps might argue from 
the girl's height, from the relative thinness of the 
neck and from a certain want of trimness in 
details that she was English. She is certainly no 

It is possible, of course, that Rembrandt for the 
first and last time in his life lighted upon some 
French or English model at Amsterdam in 1661, 
and was able to persuade her to sit to him. Yet 
the evidence now slowly accumulating of a visit to 
England in this very year, makes it also possible 
that Rembrandt found this graceful model in her 
native country, and that his last etched plate was 
etched in England. At any rate the important 
proofs of such a visit adduced in the September 
number of TiiE Burlington Magazine will per- 
haps excuse speculation on what, by itself, is but a 
trifling point, C. J. HOLMES, 


In context with the valuable information on this 
artist registered in The Burlington Magazine, 
Vol. xvi, p. 2S0 (February, 19 10), it may be of 
interest to record here the dates upon his two 
portraits in Trafalgar Square. 

They have been in the Gallery since 1891 ; the 
fact that they are signed and dated does not seem 
to have been noticed. They represent, it is alleged, 
Aglonius Voon and Cornelia Remoens, of whom 
I am in no sort of position to supply information. 
The portrait of the man is signed and dated in 
faded white, to the left behind the shoulder. ' C, 
J. Fecit' in Janssens's well-known finely-shaped 
writing, is clear enough. The date 1644 is more 
difficult of reading ; but inspected in a fair light, 
with the glass removed, is indisputable. In a 
similar style the woman's portrait is signed to the 
right, on a level with her shoulder. In this 
case the writing is less clear, the same date more 
obvious. It is not wholly irrelevant to note, in 


To the Editors of The Burlington Magazine. 

Gentlemen, — I have only lately seen Mr. 
Egerton Beck's letter in your July number, and 
though I doubt if the discussion is of interest to 
more than a very few persons, I think courtesy 
requires some answer from me. 

In my reply to his former letter I showed that the 

weight of authoritative opinion was against Mr. 

Beck's suggestion that I had put the date of the 

enamels in question too late, viz. : in the second 

half instead of the first half of the fifteenth century. 

I conclude that I have satisfied him on this 

1 For former letters on this subject see The Burlington 
Magazine, Vol, xvii, pp. 123-125, 231-232 (May, July, 1910). 

Notes on Various JVorks of Art 

connexion with these Dutch people of, one sur- 
mises, the middle class, that a pair of portraits 
closely resembling these is in Captain Keir's pos- 
session at Stirling. I here they are ascribed to 
Lely, and named Sir Richard and Lady F'anshawe, 
Mr. H. C. Fanshawe published them in his 
' Memoirs of Lady Fanshawe,' not hiding his 
suspicion that in them his ancestors had played no 
part. That they are by Janssens, or derived from 
him, is indisputable. 

An important correction, not, I think, adequately 
recognized, was made by Mr. Lionel Cust to our 
acceptance of 1648 as the year when janssens 
finally left England. Walpole, of course, was our 
authority for the tradition that in October, 1648, 
Cornelius Johnson's passport was granted by 
Parliament. The document in point is dated 1643, 
and Mr. Brockwell also, quite independently, has 
verified this by personal inspection. The account 
Vertue had, then, from Roussel that Janssens 
escaped from England at the beginning of the 
Civil War is justified. There is thus no longer any 
question of his journeys to and from the Continent 
between 1643, when we know he was at Middel- 
burg, and 1648, when we thought he was back in 
London packing up. Thanks to such discoveries, 
these journeyings now may be dismissed, and we 
may definitely accept that Janssens finally left 
England for Middelburg in 1643, where at once he 
found commissions. Perhaps Aglonius "Voon and 
Cornelia Remoens were Middelburgers. In 1646 
he was at Amsterdam, and at The Hague in 1647, 
still subscribing himself 'Londoner,' We may 
conclude, perhaps, that he stayed on at The Hague 
at least till 1649, in which year he painted the two 
dated canvases now at Ham House : the Marquis 
of Hamilton, whose portrait by Hanneman is at 
Windsor, and the Duke of Lauderdale and the 
same Hamilton in one picture. These exiles' 
portraits make what well may be Janssens's last 
link with England. They are signed Cornelius 
Jonson. C. H. C, B, 

point, for he now reverses the charge and proposes 
that I have dated one of the best known of the 
group not too late but too early, suggesting that 
the plaque with the portrait of Bishop Jean Barton 
de Montbas represents not the first bishop of that 
name but his nephew, namesake, and successor, 
Mr. Beck will find a discussion of the identity of 
this person in Ardant's ' Emailleurs et Emaillerie 
de Limoges' (pp. 96, 97) and in Bourdery's ' Les 
Emaux Peints ' (p. 13), and though the reasons 
given by these authors do not amount to proof, 
they amount to probability, and the portrait has 
been very generally accepted as that of the earlier 
Jean Barton de Montbas, bishop of Nazareth, Mr, 
Beck may have reasons for holding the view that 


Letters to the Editors 

it represents the later bishop of that name, only 
then what becomes of his contention that I was 
adopting too late a date ? 

The other point dealt with by Mr. Beck is the 
name of the bishop. I understand him to say 
that this name was not Jean Barton de Montbas, 
but Jean Barton, and that Montbas was merely 
the name of his father's fief, to the use of which 
the bishop had no claim. 

Mr. Beck quotes passages from the reference I 
gave to the Gallia Christiana, which speak of the 
bishop as ' Johannes de Barthon,' as if that was 
conclusive, though he himself has shown that this 
same authority is not infallible. Will he be sur- 
prised to learn that the late M. Maurice Ardant, 
formerly Archiviste de la Haute Vienne, part of 
the very province to which these people belonged, 
speaks of the bishop as ' Jean P'' Barton de Mont- 
bas,' of his nephew and successor as 'Jean II de 
Montbas 'and of their family as Ma maison de 
Montbas' and Ma maison Barton de Montbas' 
(' Emailleurs,' etc., pp. 95-97) ? 

If Mr. Beck is right, it is strange, too, that the 
local Societe Archeologique et Historique du 
Limousin should have printed in their ' Bulletin ' 
for 1881 a document under the title ' Mandement 
de Jean Barthon de Montbas, 6veque de Limoges,' 
etc. ; and no less surprising that De Mailhol, in his 
Dictionnaire de la Noblesse Fran^aise, includes 
the name ' Barthon de Montbas. Famille ancienne 
de la Marche,' etc. ; and that De la Chenaye- 
Desbois et Badier, in their Dictionnaire de la 
Noblesse, give with significant hyphens ' Barton- 
de-Montbas, ancienne Noblesse de la Marche,' with 
the remark that ' La famille de Barton-de-Montbas 
subsiste dans le Vicomte de Montbas,' etc. 

Mr. Beck takes no notice of the suggestion in 
my former letter that the inscription on the triptych 
whence the pseudo-name ' Monvaerni ' originated 
may quite possibly include portions of the whole of 
the bishop's name i.e., Jean Barton de Montbas 
which would remove any difficulty caused by the 
supposed use of the last part alone. Nor does Mr. 
Beck notice an error into which I fell in my article, 
by a confusion of memory between the enamel with 
the bishop's portrait and another I had in my mind. 
This piece is not a triptych, as I erroneously called 
it, but in its present state a single plaque of modest 
dimensions, most inadequately represented in 
GuibertandTixier's 'L'Art retrospectif. Exposition 
de Limoges, 1886,' pi. LX. Since Mr. Beck has 
overlooked this error, I am glad of an opportunity 
of correcting it ; it does not touch the argument 
put forward in my article. 

Finally, may 1 say that that article stated a 
theory rather than a positive conclusion, as I think 
the note of interrogation in its title should have 
made clear. For my part I do not believe 
that such a person as ' Monvaerni ' ever existed, 
and I set out to offer a hypothetical explanation 

of the inscription. If Mr. Beck or anyone else will 
offer a better one I shall be quite content with 
having stimulated enquiry towards that end. 

May I add that the Jriptych inscribed RYON, 
referred to by M. de Lo^inski in his letter, also 
in your July number, is shown by the photograph 
of it, which by your courtesy I was allowed to see, 
to be of a considerably later date than the Odiot 
triptych, though rendering the same design. 
The Limoges "enamellers of later periods not 
only often adhered to the same designs for 
religious subjects as had been employed by their 
predecessors, but even sometimes imitated these 
earlier masters' colouring. The Cottereau triptych 
of the Paris Exhibition of 1900 is not a duplicate 
of the Odiot triptych, as M. de Lozinski supposes, 
but the same piece in the hands of a subsequent 
owner. It is best shown in the phototype of the 
Odiot Catalogue ; in the other published repro- 
ductions of it the inscriptions largely disappear. 

Yours faithfully, 

i8th October, 1910. H. P. Mitchell. 

To the Editors 0/ The BURLINGTON Magazine. 
Gentlemen,— The public ought, I think, to 
realise that the ' Complete Inventory of the 
Drawings of the Turner Bequest, arranged 
chronologically' by Mr. A. J. Finberg, which was 
issued in 1909 ' by order of the Trustees,' by no 
means fulfils the requirements of an official pub- 
lication of this character. As it stands, it not only 
contains ' many substantive errors, but is likely, 
by its arbitrary methods, to mislead the public 
concerning many items of Turner's gift. 

The Trustees of the National Gallery may not 
be to blame that this precious inheritance— or, at 
least, a large part of it— has only now been dis- 
played in a ' Turner Gallery,' such as the testator 
himself stipulated should be provided. Nor, per- 
haps, is it the officials' fault that the publication of 
the ' Inventory ' has been so long delayed. Routine 
duties may well have prevented them from under- 
taking the arduous task, since they are unprovided 
with the trained assistants who do similar work 
for the British and South Kensington Museums. 
But since extraneous help was needed, the most 
competent that was available was all the more 
necessary, and notwithstanding Mr. Finberg's zeal 
and industry, I do not think he has proved himself 
adequately equipped to deal with the difficulties 
before him. Turner's obscure handwriting often 
justifies editorial doubts, but scarcely excuses Mr. 
Finberg's rash surmises. The following are but 
a few among many examples. In a ' South Wales ' 
Sketch-book (XLll), he describes a sketch, CliJ'fs, 
' Tiirl:ev' {?). The reading should quite obviously 
be Ten'by. On the previous page we find ' Pages 


Letters to the Editors 

108-9. Riiiiititi castle on hill, ivitJi winding river. 
'C.A.' Here the initials written by Turner must 
surely be ' C. H.,' and must refer to the sketch, 
'pp. 22-3, Winding river, luitli steep banks and 
distant castle. Pen and ink. Crick Howell (?) 
and River Usk' — to which Mr. Finberg adds the 
rather superfluous explanation, ' Probably Crick- 
howell.' But, apparently on the strength of this 
discovery, and merely because .-i Man-of-War,with 
boats occurs on the next leaf — evidently connected 
with 'The Docks at " Bristol" (pencil and white)' 
two pages further on — Mr. Finberg rashly 
connects the ' Crick Howell ' sketch with one in 
different Sketch-book (XLI), Men-of-War being 
toived along a river, to which he adds — ' Probably 
River Usk, near Crickhowell. St'd' Swans' Sketch- 
book, p. 23.' A glance at a map would have 
shown him that Crickhowell lies far inland, in 
Brecknockshire, where no kind of navigation is 

If we attribute to the printer such slips as ' Iron 
door' (Vol. I, p. 191), for 'Inn door'; 'The distance 
last' (p. 18), for 'lost; or even 'W. C. Chandlers' 
(Vol. I, p. 26) and 'T. Lister Barker' (p. 112) for 
'Chambers' and 'Parker' respectively, such errata 
in an official publication should have been 
noted on a corrigenda page. But what can be said 
in extenuation of the following blunders ? Turner's 
note on the back of a drawing of Townley Hall 
(XLV, p. 45) is deciphered by Mr. Finberg as 
St. Gillum Henrie,' It should, however, read 
' Sigillum Henrie' It actually refers to the 
inscription on one of the numerous seals of which 
Turner made drawings for Plate X (among 
others) of Dr. Whitaker's ' History of the Parish 
of Whalley' and the seal is either that of Henry of 
Lancaster or Henry de Lacy. Turner's note is 
important when it is correctly interpreted, because 
it gives circumstantial evidence that he made 
drawings for this Plate X, although the name of the 
draughtsman is not stated upon the engraving, 
and that the drawings were removed from this 
Sketch-book for the engraver's use. This evidently 
also happened to the eight drawings, engraved on 
Plate III of the same work, which were presented 
by Ruskin in 1861 to the Fitzwilliara Museum, 

Similarly, Mr. Finberg's version of Turner's 
note (page i of the same Sketch-book) of the 
inscription on Sir Richard Sherburne's monument 
in Sherbnrne Chapel in Mil ton Chnrcli is full of 
misreadings. Reference to Whitaker's ' History of 
Whalley' (Vol. II, p. 448) would have rendered 
Turner's meaning perfectly clear ; but since Mr. 
Finberg tells us that this was the 'Sketch for the 
drawing engraved in Whitaker's " History and 
Antiquities of the Deanery of Craven," ' we 
cannot help wondering whether he ever tried to 
verify his statement; for the inventory may be 
searched in vain for the recognition of the 

Fonnlains Abbey subject engraved in that work. 
But these positive errors are not more unfor- 
tunate than Mr. Finberg's lack of judgment. 
He has interpolated into an Inventory of 
Turner's bequest other drawings by Turner 
which he did not bequeath — notably ' the twenty- 
three Drawings bequeathed by Mr. Henry 
Vaughan,' as indeed is declared on the title-page; 
and he has scattered these drawings among those 
bequeathed by Turner himself. Another of the 
more serious blemishes in the work, and one to 
which I would call especial attention, is Mr, 
Finberg's repudiation of the authenticity of so 
large a part of the Turner bequest. This destroys 
the essential value of the publication as an official 
Register, and is a perversion of the legitimate 
purpose of the schedule, which cannot be con- 
sidered ' A Complete Inventory,' since it does not 
include the oil-paintings of the bequest. But, since 
Mr. Finberg has far exceeded those limits in the 
direction of a general critical catalogue of Turner's 
works, why has he included some and excluded 
others of the oil sketches, of which many examples 
have been brought to light and exhibited during 
recent years ? I find in the eighteenth edition of the 
official ' Catalogue of the National Gallery — British 
Art,' just issued, the statement (p. 283) that Mr. 
Finberg supplied the titles and notes to Nos. 2691- 
2707. It would be interesting to know whether 
there still exist more works than have been now 
added to that catalogue, especially since it is stated 
(footnote, p. 240) that five drawings have been 
omitted from the 'Inventory.'' It is still more 
pertinent to inquire whether the authorities of the 
National Gallery have given a bare iniprimatiir, or 
have set their seal upon Mr. Finberg's publication. 
For I have been astonished to find, on examining 
it closely, that he has 'rejected' the authenticity 
of no fewer than 357 drawings, or leaves in 
the sketch-books, which, in his opinion, are 
not by Turner, and has relegated them to 'An 
Appendix of Doubtful and Other Drawings.' Has 
this critical ' inferno,' created, as I hold, with no 
valid reason, been invented by Mr. Finberg on 
his own responsibility ? Surely, his opinion 
cannot be endorsed by the Trustees, and although 
the compiler himself seems (from his preface) 
proud of his indiscretions, Sir Charles Holroyd 
does not accept responsibility for them in his 
interesting preliminary remarks."^ 

The protest which I make, most strongly, is 
that no criticisni ivhatever was proper to an 
Inventory, and should, on the contrary, have 
been studiously avoided. Remarks furthering the 

' We ought surely to know the five drawings omitted 
are. They may be some I am unable to trace anywhere in the 

*I notice, however, in the new edition of the official 'Cata- 
logue of the National Gallery ' already quoted, a footnote, on 
page 239, stating that ' Mr, Finberg relegates CCCLXVI — 
CCCLXXX to an Appendix, . . including drawings by Samuel 
Scott, Rooker, Dayes, De Loutherbourg, Girtin, etc' 


Letters to the Editors 

identification of the sketches and any other available 
facts would have been welcome. Anytiiing in the 
form of criticism affecting the authenticity of the 
work should have been reserved for separate con- 
sideration. This might have taken the form, cither 
of a report to the Trustees, accompanied by a 
schedule, or of a treatise published elsewhere. 

Besides the 357 rejected drawings in the Appen- 
dix many others also are accounted doubtful by 
Mr. Finberg, although he does leave them in their 
chronological places. These include over thirty 
Academv'studies from the ' Antique,' or drawings 
from the ' Life ' School, historically very interest- 
ing and important. To this subject I will return 
presently. The public, however, will assuredly be 
surprised to learn that so many as sixty-four of the 
repudiated drawings have hitherto been constantly 
exhibited as Turner's, among specially selected 
examples of his work, either within the National 
Gallery itself, or in the ' Loan Collections ' lent 
by the Trustees to schools of art at Oxford, and 

The reasons which Mr. Finberg adduces for 
his 'rejections' are also very often curiously 
illogical and inconclusive. For example, he 
furnishes us with much information derived 
from the attendance registers of the Royal 
Academy, from which unimpeachable evidence, 
attested on every occasion by Turner's own hand, 
we may gather that he paid fully 185 visits to 
the Antique (Plaster) Class, and attended 200 
times at the Life School. Mr. Finberg admits a 
series of 23 studies (on 18 sheets) of ' the Antique,' 
and 13 drawings of the nude figure. We should 
naturally expect to find some scores of such 
drawings executed during an attendance period of 
seven or eight years, from June 25, 1792, to 
November 25, 1799, or later. But these 36 drawings 
are the whole result ; and Mr. Finberg attempts to 
show that, with four exceptions, even these are 
spurious. His reason for doing so is the bare 
sucfgestion that they are by Hamilton, and were 
derived from a certain portfolio, which he can 
adduce no evidence to prove ever came within the 
precincts of the National Gallery. I could, if space 
allowed, conclusively prove that there are no 
grounds whatever for discreditingTurner's 'author- 
ship ' of these drawings. Even the sketch-books 
which Turner so eagerly bought back at the famous 

While going to press we learn that this Society, 
which supplements the work of the National 
Art Collections Fund as regards quite modern 
art, has acquired by gift a very fine Conder. 
It has also made its first purchases— Augustus 
John's Smiling Woiiinii, reproduced in The 
Burlington Magazine for May, 1909, which 
is f^enerally accepted as the finest picture he has 
so'^far painted ; a large study for a decoration 

Monro sales at Christie's in 1833, full of his own 
sketches alone, are among the rejected series.* 
Most of the other repudiated drawings were also 
from one or another of Turner's numerous 
Sketch-books, to which other artists had no access. 
It is strange, indeed, that Mr. Finberg has not 
borne in mind the history of the legal proceedings 
which he has himself quoted in the preface to the 
' Inventory' (page v). Who could suppose, from 
his process of elimination, that any such exacting 
conditions in the discrimination of Turner's handi- 
work as were imposed by the Vice-Chancellor 
had been already fulfilled ? Certainly, no more 
capable adjudicators, or higher authorities in 
their day, could possibly have been appointed. 
Sir Charles Eastlake was Turner's companion 
at his work in early life, a fellow Acade- 
mician, and the sharer of his studio in Rome. 
Mr. John Prescott Knight was Secretary of the 
Royal Academy, and consequently in touch with 
all the other members who knew the testator's 
work. Moreover, such very intimate friends of 
Turner as George Jones, Charles Turner, and Mr. 
Trimmer, were among his executors. Why should 
it be imagined that they would ascribe other 
artists' work to Turner ? It is quite inconceivable. 
Yet Mr. Finberg allows himself to believe that 
he has better means of judging Turner's work, 
and can readily correct their mistakes. So, with 
an ipse dixit, he has swept aside some four hundred 
drawings as 'doubtful,' which had been duly 
authenticated by judges possessing unique qualifi- 
cations. Among some twenty thousand drawings, 
a few by other draughtsmen may conceivably have 
slipped in by mistake, but the rejection of so many 
in an official publication, which claims authority, 
is a matter for inquiry. The public had a right to 
demand the fullest and most searching discussion 
concerning the authenticity, and consequent value 
of their property, before it was even nominally 
depreciated by any semi-official confirmation of a 
single critic's unsupported judgment. I trust 
that this judgment may yet be revised by that of 
competent assessors. —Yours faithfully, 

William White. 

^ Lots 7S, 79 and others in the tliird day's sale are cases in 
point. Ruskin, indeed, annotated the lirst ' of hardly any 
value ' ; but Mr. Finberg adduces no external evidence worth 
considering, that the sketches are not by Turner. 

by Puvis de Chavannes ; as well as numerous 
drawings by contemporary artists. It will be seen, 
therefore, that the new society is endeavouring to' 
remove the stigma of the neglect of all independent 
contemporary art by public institutions in this 
country, and should enlist the support of all those 
who have not abandoned hope for the future of 
our national art. The Treasurer of the Society is 
Lord Henry Bentinck, 53, Grosvenor Street, of 
whom further information may be obtained. — Ed. 



Theory and Practice of Perspective. By 
G. A. Storey. A.R.A. Oxford : Clarendon 

Mr. Storey explains the theory and practice of 

perspective for ahnost every possible contingency, 
and his own simplifications of method are neat and 
serviceable. The book more than exhausts the 
subject, it exhausts the reader, for there are so 
many examples of how to put up in perspective 
specific objects, crosses, steps, roofs, etc., which, 
the principle once understood, could be worked 
out by any intelligent student. Nor indeed does 
Mr. Storey give his student the credit for much 
intelligence ; for instance, Chapter XLIV, with 
its elaborate illustration, goes to show that when 
you draw a scene from a high balcony some way 
back the ground immediately under that balcony 
does not come into the picture. He has a theory 
that pictures taken from below the object should 
be hung high up and vice versa. Surely this is an 
error. According to Mr. Storey some of Degas's 
works would hang best in a pit below the skirting, 
and some of Tintoret's from the top of a high 
ceiling. There is no advantage gained by seeing 
the picture foreshortened. The best place from 
which to see a picture is as nearly as possible 
opposite to it — i.e., from where it was painted. 

The author, like Uccelli and Mantegna on occa- 
sion, evidently has, for a painter, a morbid interest 
in perspective. He loves the fun of it, its optical 
surprises and illusions ; it gives him the 'pleasure 
of deceiving and being deceived by the senses,' and 
food for the 'reasoning faculties.' He cites the 
keenness with which da Vinci and Durer studied 
it ; but this must have been a scientific interest 
apart from art just as a lover of flowers sometimes 
studies botany. Though Mr. Storey admits that 
effects of great distance cannot be got by aid of 
perspective, and himself can draw by sight a castle 
and river in perfect perspective, yet he says that 
his science is useful for testing what you have 
done. Invention is the mother of necessity I But 
he gives no reasonable ground for the help that 
perspective can be to the painter or student. Is 
there one ? The Paul Veronese of to-day can 
employ as of old an architect to give him an 
accurate setting ; whilst in drawing from nature, 
if the artist cannot get the perspective right he can 
trace it on a sheet of glass and transfer it to his 
canvas. But even this should not be necessary. 
If I so draw the foreshortened roof of a house that 
it seems to go uphill I can bring it down till it 
looks level ; and so by a little practice, and in 
complete ignorance of perspective's laws, I ought 
to be able to give a convincing representation of 
the actual form of everything. 

Psychologically, drawing by sight and by the 
aid of perspective are essentially opposite processes. 
The artist has a complete image in his mind of the 
forms he is going to draw before he sets pencil to 
paper to register it, the professor of perspective 

does not know what his forms are going to look 
like till he has finished them. The artist sees 
something and then draws it, the professor draws 
something and then sees it. Is this blind method 
of representing the facts of visible nature one to 
teach to students ? Can they profit by it ? The 
science of Perspective is not the whole of art, 
because Japanese and Persian pictures are as 
pleasant as modern European ones, nor is perspec- 
tive even a part of art, because, by a process of 
copying and accumulated experience, it can be, 
and generally is, entirely dispensed with. 

J. R. F. 

Nineteenth-Century Artists, English and 
French. By William Knight, Emeritus Pro- 
fessor of Philosophy in the University of St. 
Andrew's. Edinburgh : Otto Schulze and Co. 
Six Lectures delivered at the Art Institute at 
Chicago on the Scammon Foundation. The 
choice of Prof. William Knight to give this course 
of ' Scammon Lectures ' was a happy one, for the 
lecturer was able to present to an American 
audience a study of nineteenth-century art, which 
was not based on mere technical discussion, but 
touched that human note which most readily 
interests unlearned listeners. As the lectures deal 
with rather familiar subjects — Turner, Corot, 
Millet, Ruskin, Watts, Burne-Jones, and others — 
they are hardly open to criticism. It will be 
sufficient to say that the lecturer seems to have 
made good use of his opportunity, to have justified 
his reputation as a Scottish professor, and to have 
embodied the lectures in a volume, which should 
prove a source of pleasant instruction to others 
beside the Chicago students for whom they were 
originally intended. L. C. 

Duchess of Sutherland's Cripples' Guild, 

We have pleasure in acknowledging the receipt 
of a pretty portfolio of illustrations, showing the 
success of this excellent guild, founded by Her 
Grace for the purpose of teaching crippled lads a 
trade. Not only has the guild been successful in 
that respect, but the boys' work appears to be 
excellent and wisely directed on fine lines. 


[a] The second edition of the Guide to English 
Pottery and Porcelain in the British Museum, 
originally published in 1903, incorpor.ates some 
sound changes in attribution. It also for the first 
time offers a guide to English pottery and English 
porcelain between the same covers. — [b] This is 
part 4 of the General Index of the Winter 
Exhibitions at Burlington House beginning from 
1870. Though the Index might have been very 
useful, its usefulness is greatly decreased by the 
total lack of connexion between its two parts, 
the List of Contributors and the List of Artists 



Since about half the exhibitors have apparently 
lent but one picture each during ten years, it can 
surely be of little use to chronicle the fact without 
giving any reference by which a particular picture 
can be traced to its o\vner. — [c] The Soane 
Museum lends itself less readily than other public 
galleries to cataloguing. There is so much to see 
besides pictures. Hence a distinct want is supplied 
by this ' General Description ' of the Museum, with 
its forty illustrations and business-like arrange- 
ment. — [d] An English translation, and a most 
complete catalogue of the Rijks Museum, Amster- 
dam, comprising pictures, miniatures, pastels, 
framed water-colour drawings and other exhibits 
with facsimiles of the artists' signatures on the 
pictures and of some escutcheons of their sitters. 
The reproductions are scarcely required, as, being 
on leaded paper, they add to the size and weight 
of the book. Besides indexes of the portraits, 
places and names of artists, there is a list of photo- 
graphs which can be obtained at the Museum. 
Without the illustrations this would be about the 
best hand-catalogue of a public gallery which has 
ever been published. — [e] A useful catalogue with 
a great number of reproductions of the works of 
art shown at the Japan-British Exhibition, repro- 
duced by a process which is apparently of the 
nature of collotype. Some of the sculpture, notably 
the masks, is very successfully reproduced, but 
we cannot say the same of the pictures, a great 
number of which by no means do justice to the 
marvellous beauty of the originals. This is par- 
ticularly regrettable in the case of those extremely 
early works which were shown only for a short 
time at the beginning of the exhibition, such as 
the adorable Bodhisaitva, fig. 2, and the Lotus and 
the Heron, figs. 7 and 8. It would certainly be 
well worth while, should the authorities see their 
way, to bring out a series of more advanced illus- 
trations of the finest examples of Japanese painting 
shown at the exhibition. — [f] The second volume 
is devoted to works of modern art, in which the 
reproductions have on the whole succeeded better. 
It has been a matter of great regret to many lovers 
of Eastern art that the conditions under which the 

early paintings were exhibited at Shepherd's Bush 
gave so little opportunity for prolonged study. 
These catalogues will certainly do something to 
remedy that defect.— [g] The Hans Schwarz 
Collection, Vienna, will be on view from the 5th 
to the 7th of November, and will be sold on the 
8th and 9th at Lepke's Auction Rooms, Berlin. 
The contents number over 300 antiques of all 
species — pictures, carvings in wood and stone, 
textiles, metal-work, armour, furniture, stained- 
glass, ceramics — and the catalogue includes nearly 
as many good collotype illustrations. An enticing 
catalogue — especially to collectors of German 
work. — [h] Herr Lepke has issued a catalogue of the 
magnificent collection, largelyof German porcelain, 
formed by Herr Carl Jourdan. It includes all 
sorts of china figures, vases, and dishes, which are 
amply illustrated by seventy pages of plates, the 
w-hole forming a souvenir sumptuous far beyond its 
primary purpose — that of the sale room. — [l] We 
have just received an advanced set of some two 
dozen plates illustrating the catalogue of the Van 
Alen and Seymour-Hayden Collections, which will 
be sold at Muller's auction rooms, Amsterdam, on 
November 22. The illustrations at least seem to 
be all of Dutch pictures, which bear such names 
as Van Goyen, Jacob Van Loo, Breughel the elder, 
and Jan Steen. Well-illustrated catalogues of two 
other sales of modern pictures at the same rooms, 
on November 8, have unfortunately arrived too 
late for further notice. 

[a] a Guide to English Pottery and Porcelain : In the Depart- 
ment of British and Mediaeval Antiquities, is. — [b] General 
Index to the Catalogues of the Winter E.\hibitions at the Royal 
Academy from igoo-igog. The Royal Academy, is. 6d. — 
[c] General Description of Sir John Soane's Museum : with 
Brief Notices of some of tlie more Interesting Works of Art — 
IXth Edition. 6d.— [d] Catalogue of the Pictures, etc., in the 
Kijl;s Museum at Amsterdam with Supplement compiled by 
B. W. F. Van Riewsdijk. (5 by 8). Dutch Home Office.— 
[e] An Illustrated Catalogue of Japanese Old Fine Arts at the 
Japan-British Exhibition, 1910. — [f] An Illustrated Catalogue 
of Japanese Modern Fine Arts at the Japan-British Exhibition 
1910. Compiled by the Office of the Imperial Japanese Govern- 
ment Commission .... The Shimbi Shoin.— [Gj Sammlung 
Hans Schwarz, Wien. Rudolph Lepke's Kunst-Auctions-Haus, 
Berlin.— [h] Sammlung Carl Jourdan. Rudolph Lepke's 
Kunst-Auctions-Haus (Frankfurt a.M.), loM.— [l] F. Muller and 
Co., Amsterdam, 



DUSSAUD (R.). Les civilisations prihelleniques dans le bassin de 
la Mer Egee. (11 x 7) Paris (Geuthner), I2frs. Illustrated. 

Baikie (Rev. J.). The sea-kings of Crete. (8x5) London 
(Black), 7s. 6d. net. 32 plates. 

Berchem (M. van) and Strzvgowski (J.). Amida. (13x9) 
Heidelberg (Winter), Paris (Leroux), 60 M. 

The text, in French or German, is accompanied by a 
contribution upon the churches and monasteries of the Tur 
Abdin, by Miss G. L. Bell. Illustrated. 

Kaufmann (K. M.). Die Menasstadt und das National Heilig- 
tumderaltchristlichenAgypter in der Westalexandrinischen 
Wiiste. Vol. I. (13 x 10) Leipzig (Hiersemann). 102 collo- 
type plates, etc, 

* Sizes (height x w 

ViAUD (P.). Nazareth et ses deux eglises de I'Annonciation et 

de Saint Joseph d'apres les fouilles recentes. (10 xS) Paris 

BovET (M. A. de). Cracovie. (10x7) Paris (Laurens), 5 fr. 

118 illustrations. 
Pesenti (P.). Bergamo. (11x7) Bergamo (Istituto d'Arti 

graSchcj,4l. 50. Illustrated. 
Holtmever (A.). Die Bau- und Kunstdenkmaler im Regier- 

ungsbezirk Cassel. Vol, IV. Kreis Cassel-Land. (13x10) 

Marburg (Elwert), 18 M. 209 plates. 
Victoria County History of Nottinghamshire. Vol. II. Edited 

by W. Page. (12x8) London (Constable). 
Sanders (L.). Old Kew, Chiswick and Kensington. (9XO) 

London (Methuen), 12s. 6d. net, 

idth) in inches. 


Recent Art Publications 

Cl'ST (R. H.). The life of Benvenuto Cellini, 2 vols. (8x5) 

London (I5ell), 25s. net. 
Herkomer (Sir H. von). The Heikomers. (9x6) London 

(Macmilbn), 7s. 6d. net. 
Chamberlain- (A. B,). George Romney. (10x7) London 

iMethiien), 12s. 6d. net. 73 plates. 
Knapp (F.). Andre.1 Mantegnn, des Meisters Gemalde und 

Kupferstiihe in 200 Abbildungen. (10x7) Stuttgirt 

(Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt), 8 M. 
AUBERT ;(A.). Runge und die Roniaiilik. (9x7) Berlin 


EcKHARDT (A.). Die Baukunst in Salihurg u-.ihrend des XVII 

J.ihrhunderts. (10 x6) Strasburg (Heitz), 8 M. Illustrated. 
Witting (F.). Vier Beilriige zur Geschichte der Baukunst 

Frankreichs. (iix 8) Strasburg (Heitz), 3M. 50. 4 plates. 
L'architecture et la decoration franvaises aux XVIII'' et XIX' 

siecles. (:;ixi4) Paris (Lib. centrale d'art et d'architec- 

ture). Phototype plates and descriptive text. 
Reuther (O.). Das Wohnhaus in Bagdad und anderen Stadte 

des Irak (iixS) Berlin (Wasinuth), 6 M. Illustrated. 

ViN'Cl (L. da). Traite de la peinture. Traduction nouvelle 

d'apres le Codex Vaticanus avec un comnientaire perpetuel 

par Peladan. (10x7) Paris (Delagrave), 7 fr. 50. 
Chanxellur (E. B.I. Walks among London's pictures. (7x4) 

London (Kegan Paul), 7s. 6d. net. 
Michel (E.). Great masters of landscape painting. From Ihe 

French of E. M. (12x8) London (Heinemann), 30s. net. 

Osmaston (P. F. B.). The Paradise of Tintoretto. (12x9) 

Bognor (Pear Tree Press), los 6d Plates. 
Rolfs (W.), Geschichte dcr iMaleiei Neaptls. (12x8) Leipzig 

(Seemann), 25 M. 1 13 plates. 
GoiFFREY (J). La peinture fran^aise. (17x14) Paris (' ib. 

centrale d'art et d'architecture) ; Part i. with 20 cjllotype 

plates, 26 fr. To be complete in 3 parts. 
Sei-Itchi-Taki. Three essays on oriental painting. (11x8) 

Landon (Qiiaritch), iSs. net. 57 plates. 


Nauman (H.). Die HoUschnitte des Meisters vom Amsterdtmer 
Kabinett zuin Spiegel menschlicher Behaltnis (gedruckt zu 
Speier bei P. Drach). (ioa6) Strasburg (Heitz), 20 M. 
274. illustrations. 

ScHREiBER (W. L.). Manuel de I'Amateur de la gravure sur 
bois et sur metal au XV= siecle. Toine V, contenant un 
catalogue des incunables a figures imprimes en Allemagne, 
Suisse, Autriche-Honf:rie et Scandinavie. icre partie : 
A-I. (10x7) Leipzig (Harrasowitz), 12 M, 

Erbach-FBrstenau (Count zu). Die Manfredbibel. (13X9) 

Leipzig (Hiersemann, for the Royal Prussian Historical 

Institute). 15 M. 
Bibliotheque Nationale, Departement des Manuscrits. Livre de 

la Chasse par Gaston Phoebus, c jmte de Koix. (8 x 6) Paris 

(Berthaud), i^ fr. go plates. 
Marignan (A.). Etude sur le nianuscritde I'Hortus Deliciarum. 

(10x6) SIrasburg (Heitz), 3M. 50. 


HoBSON (R. L.). Worcester porcelain. A description of the 
ware from the Wall period to the present day. (14X11) 
London (Quaritch), 1265. net. 109 plates, some in colour. 

Dillon (E.). Porcelain, and how to colUct it. (8x5) London 
(Methuen), 6s. 36 plates. 

Les cartons de la Manufacture Nationale de Sevres. Epoques 
Louis XVI et Empire. Publies sous la direction de A. 
Sandier, avec une introduction et une tab'e analytique par 
G, Lechevallier-Chevignard. (18x13) Paris (Massin), 50 fr. 
28 plates, coloured. 

Basserman'N-Jordan (F.). Fiihrer durch das Pfalzische Wein- 
Museum im historischen Museum der Pfalz zu Speyer am 
Rhein. (9x6) Speyer (Historische Museum), i M. 48 pp., 


ScHEUBER (J.). Die mittelalterlichen Chors'iihle inderSchweiz. 

(10 X 6) Strasburg (Heitz), 6 M. 11 plates. 
Aveling (C. N.). Dates in English furniture. London (N. 

Clifford), IS. 
The Furniture Designs of Thomas Sheraton. Arranged by 

J. Munro Bell. With an introduction and critical estimate 

by A, Hayden, (12x9) London (Gibbings), 153. net. 


Williamson (G. C). Catalogue of the collection of jewels and 

precious works of art, the property of J, Pierpont Morgan. 

(13x10) London (Chiswick Press, privately piinted). 

Plates, some chrom. 
Art treasures of the Koyasan temples. (15x11) Tokyo (the 

Kokka Publishing Co.), 30s. 73 collotype plates with 

descriptions in English and Japanese. 
Farcy ( Monographic de la cathcdrale d'.\ngers : les 

meubles. (u x 9) Angers (chez I'auteur), 21 fr. Illustrated. 
Dearmer (Rev. P.). Filty pictures of Gothic altars. (10x7) 

London, New York (Longmans, Green, for the Alcuin 

Club), 2 IS. Process illustrations. 
Delville (J.). The new mission of art. Translated by Francis 

Colmer, with introductory notes by Clifford Bax and 

Edward Schnee. (9x6) London (Grittiths), 7s. 6d. net. 
Hooper (L.). Handloom weaving, plain and ornamental. 

(7x51 London (Hogg's ' Artistic Crafts Series'), 6s. net. 

Illustrations, including collotype reproductions of ancient 

and modern textiles. 
Ballet (A.). Le droit d'auteur sur les reuvres de peinture et 

de sculpture. (10x6) Paris (Giard). 
Tavernor. Perry (J ). Dinanderie. A history and description 

of mediaeval art work in copper, brass and bronze. (10 x S) 

London (Allen), 2is. net. Illustrated. 
Gale(E.J.). Pewter and the amateur collector. (gx6) London 

(Warner), 7s. 6d. Illustrated. 
Fontaine (A.). Les collections de I'Academie royale de 

Peinture et de Sculpture. (10x6) Paris (Laurens), 9 fr. 

12 plates. 
Yo.XALL(Sir J.). The A B C about collecting. (8x6) London 

(Stanley Paul), 5s. net. Illustrated. 
General description of Sir John Soane's Museum. Ninth 

edition, revised and enl.irged. (8x5) Oxford (Hart, 

printed). Il.ustrated. 


HE Autumn Salon has had 
u]\c bonne prcssc this yeaf. 
Even the critics who most 
disHke the new schools of 
painting have had a good 
word for the present exhi- 
bition ; they say that it is 
much more sane than usual. 
That may be, but it is certainly more dull. There 
are ominous signs that the mediocrity which is 
the curse of the Spring Salons is overtaking their 

heretical rival. One is tempted to think that a 
hanging committee is fated, in the end, to en- 
courage mediocrity and that, after all, the anarchical 
system of the Independants is the best. Certainly 
one sees on the walls of the Salon des Indepen- 
dants considerable quantities of the most appalling 
rubbish, which no hanging committee in the world 
would look at twice ; but there are compensations 
which, perhaps, outweigh that disadvantage. Now 
and then it happens that an artist who cannot 
persuade a jury to take him at his own valuation 



Art in France 

is a better judi^e of his own capacities than the 
jury; it is worth while to wade through many 
yards of rubbish in order to come across one such 

Naturally, there is much in tlic Autumn Salon 
that is worth seeing, more in proportion, perhaps, 
than in other salons. For instance, there are the 
eight decorative panels that M. Maurice Denis 
has painted for M. Charles Stern's hold. These 
have won almost unanimous approval and have 
roused to enthusiasm even those critics to whom M. 
Denis has hitherto been least svmpathetic. I hope 
that it is not a mere spirit of contradiction that 
makes me unable to join the chorus without 
reserve. Of course, the panels are beautiful ; they 
are the work of the greatest living dect)rative 
painter, on whom has fallen the mantle of Puvis 
de Chavannes, and they have all the charm of 
colour and form that distinguishes his work. But 
I cannot agree with the opinion so widely expressed 
that M. Denis has never given us anything so 
good. I remember other decorations of his which 
seem to me far superior, and the Ovphcc, which 
was shown in the Xew Salon last Spring, was 
surely a much greater achievement. That was a 
great w'ork of art, a complete expression of the 
personality of the artist ; these panels are delicious, 
exquisite, but they are not that. 

Among the decorations the most curious and re- 
markable are the four large panels by M. Bonnard. 
They show an essentially impressionist technique 
with vague and elusive atmospheric effect brought 
into the service of a delightfully fresh and vigorous 
feeling for decorative design. M. Bonnard has 
here accomplished a fusion which might well have 
seemed impossible. 

It is especially in regard to decoration that one 
expects to find the Autumn Salon superior to the 
others, and it is especially in this regard that one 
is disappointed this year. The two panels repre- 
senting Geology and Zoology that Mademoiselle 
Dufau has painted for the Sorbonne, show her 
great talent, but less than her usual sense of decora- 
tion ; they lack simplicity and directness, and 
their colour is unpleasantly hot. Somehow one 
feels that there is a great deal too much of them. 
Unsatisfying, too, is the decoration that M. Serf 
has painted for a ball-room at Barcelona ; it harks 
back to the Venetians of the decadence. Here 
again is talent and great talent, but a debased form 
of art. 

The more recent work of M. Henri-Matisse has, I 
confess, been incomprehensible to me, no doubt 
through my own incapacity; but the two decorative 
panels that he exhibits this autumn I find quite 
comprehensible and most masterly, especially that 
in which the red figures dance a round. Here is 
decoration rightly understood, of a daring 
simplicity and a marvellous accomplishment. 
Let It not be said that this sort of thing appeals 

1 Z'j 

only to a select few ; I visited the Salon with a 
companion of some na'ural taste but very slight 
artistic knowledge, a young girl in her teens, who 
without hesitation picked out these panels of 
Henri- Matisse as the two best pictures in the room. 
Among other painters of the Symbolist school M. 
Maurice Vlaminck holds a high place ; his two 
landscapes are not the best work of his that I have 
seen, but how far above the average. The influence 
of C6zaime is manifest, but the artist had not 
surrendered to it his own personality. M. Louis 
Valtat is another painter of great talent, who is 
fairly well represented by his two pictures of the 
Bois de Boulogne. M. Alcorta, a Brazilian 
painter, whose W(jrk I do not remember to have 
seen before, is extremely interesting, and if, as I 
suppose, he is a young man, much may be expected 
of him. An Austrian, M. Georg Kars, contributes 
five paintings of considerable promise. Madame 
Rena Hassenberg shows an advance on her 
previous work. 

Among works of a different tendency to be 
noticed is the painful but very remarkable Christ 
at the pillar of M. Georges Desvallieres. M. Pierre 
Laprade's two Roman watercolours are quite 
charming and his decorative landscape of the old 
port of Marseilles with Notre Dame de la Garde 
in the background is one of the best pictures of 
his that I have seen. M. van Dongen is as clever 
as ever and less aggressive than usual. M. Felix 
Vallotton's accomplishments are indisputable, but 
I do not care for his modern version of Perseus 
and Andromeda. Those who know the Autumn 
Salon will meet again with pleasure such constant 
exhibitors as AL Manguin, M. Dufrenoy, M. 
Guerin, M. Lacoste, etc., and should lookout for M. 
Dusouchet, Mrs. Egan, Mile. Kleinmann, M. Leon 
Lehmann and M. Louis Paviot. M. Andre Chapuy 
is a young painter of great charm and promise, 
who is well represented by three paintings and 
two watercolours. 

The sculptures, few in number, include a mas- 
terly statue in plaster of Pomona by M. Aristide 
Maillol and two remarkable plasters by M. Rene 
Ouillivic. The retrospective section consists of 
works by Edmond Lempereur and Eugene Tri- 
goulet, both of whom died this year, and by 
Frederic Bazille, one of the early Impressionists, 
who was killed at the battle of Beaune-la-Rolande 
in 1870 at the age of 29. Bazille, it will remem- 
bered, appears in Fantin- Latour's picture of 
Manet's studio, now in the Luxembourg, where he 
is represented as talking to Zola. His work shows 
strongly, in many cases, the influence of Manet, 
not without a certain personal touch ; had he 
lived longer, he might have further developed his 
personality. As it is, his pictures, though distinctly 
interesting and of considerable talent, are too 
reminiscent of greater men to secure him endu- 
ring fame ; in some the influence of Corot is very 

Art in France 

marked. Leitipereur was a later Impressionist of 
talent, who deserved this posthumous honour. 

The applied arts always take a prominent place 
at the Autumn Salon. This year, in addition to 
the usual French e.xhibits, there is a whole section 
devoted to Munich artists. It is arranged as a 
suite of rooms, ready for habitation. Architects, 
decorators, painters, furniture designers and artists 
of all sorts have co-operated; the cabinets are filled 
with small objects and pictures are hung on the 
walls. Such an exhibition is extremely interesting, 
but I cannot say that Munich decoration or 
Munich furniture makes a strong appeal to my 
taste. Only such of the furniture as is extremely 
simple and severe is tolerable (and this applies 
equally to the French room upstairs) ; it is sad, 
but it is true, that the only really satisfying modern 
furniture is an imitation of the old. 

The museum of Chartres, which includes much 
of interest, and is at present inadequately lodged 
in the Town Hall, is at last to be moved to a more 
appropriate and ampler home in the old episcopal 
palace, ne.xt to the Cathedral. Two years ago the 
Department of Eure-et-Loir offered the palace 
gratuitously to the town on condition that it 
should be converted into a museum, but the 
municipality shrank from the expense of the 
installation, which was estimated at 150,000 francs 
at the least, and is now expected to come to more. 
The difficulty has been solved by the generosity of 
a well-known inhabitant of Chartres, M. Maugin, 
who has contributed 100,000 francs towards the 
sum required ; as the State is also contributing 
70,000 francs, the cost to the town v^fill be little or 
nothing. M. Maugin, who is now in his ninetieth 
year, has already given to the museum an im- 
portant collection of armour, oriental and Egyptian 
antiquities, bronzes, etc., and has promised to 
present or bequeath the rest of his collection when 
the transfer is completed. The beautiful gardens 
of the palace, which command a fine view of the 
valley of the Eure, will be thrown open to the 
public when the new museum is ready. 

The scheme for transferring the collections of the 
Luxembourg to the Seminary of St. Sulpice still 
hangs fire. The truth is that the seminary building 
is so unsuitable to the purpose that it would 
require a remodelling which would leave little but 
the four walls and would cost almost as much as 
its demolition and the erection of a new building. 
That would be a far better solution, as Paris could 
have a modern picture gallery entirely fitted to its 
purpose. The site is an admirable one and a new 
building could stand further back in the large 
gardens, so as to be surrounded by them. The 
present building is a hideous erection without any 
artistic value and its disappearance could be con- 
templated without a pang. Something will have 
to be done, for the overcrowding of the Luxem- 
bourg is becoming acute; even when all the 
pictures that ought to be transferred to the Louvre 
have gone, it will be impossible to hang all that 

The work of preparing part of the Pavilion de 
Flore for the reception of the Chauchard collec- 
tion and other new acquisitions of the Louvre is 
now practically finished and the arrangement of 
the collections is in progress. It is still hoped 
that they will be opened at the end of November. 
The MuseeCarnavalet will be considerably enlarged 
by a new building in course of erection, with a 
frontage on the rue de Sevigne and a large court- 
yard. The new building will be in the same style 
as the hotel of Madame de Sevigne,which now con- 
tains the museum, of which it will form a con- 
tinuation. It will consist of three storeys built 
round the courtyard. The staircase will be decor- 
ated with frescoes by the two Brusati, father and 
son, painted in 1735. These frescoes were formerly 
in the Hotel de Luynes in the Boulevard St. Ger- 
main and were bought by the State for 3,000 francs 
when that hotel was demolished m 1901. It was 
necessary to divide them into five hundred pieces 
in order to remove them, but the delicate and 
dangerous operation of removing and piecing them 
together again was successfully accomplished. 

R. E. D. 


HE Carstanjen Collection 
has been withdrawn from the 
Kaiser Friedrich Museum at 
Berlin and will be housed for 
some time, as a loan exhibi- 
tion, within the old Pina- 
kothek at Munich. The wall 
space thus liberated at Berlin, 
has been utilized for the better hanging of the 
Rembrandts, many of which were hitherto placed 
unfavourably on walls of small side rooms. 

Besides this positive loss, the Berlin Museum 
has suffered an ideal one, in consequence of an 

article by Alois Griinwald recently published in 
the ' Miinchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst.' 
Griinwald has proved pretty conclusively that the 
Giovannino ascribed to Michelangelo Buonarotti 
at Berlin, is not the work of a cinquecento master 
at all, let alone Buonarotti's, but that it is by 
Domenico Pieratti. The article, which has 
attracted considerable attention, further ascribes 
the restoration of the Bacchus at the Uffizi to 
Giovanni Caccini (vice Buonarotti), and the 
Dying Adonis at the Museo Nazionale at Flor- 
ence to Vincenzio de' Rossi, also in place of 


Art in Germany 

One of the most important acquisitions that 
have taken place at any of the Munich Museums 
for a long time, is the tigure of a nude young man, 
bought for the Glyptothek from a private Russian 
collection for ^0,000. It is somewhat similar to 
the so-called Apollo of Tcnca in the same collection, 
but considerably larger, dating from about 600 H-C. 
The statue is broken in several places, but the 
pieces have been rejoined most carefully, and it 
has the tine, roseate patina which antique 
marbles that have lain for some time in the soil of 
Asia Minor display. 

The Museum of Coins and Medals at Munich 
has arranged an important show of falsifications. 
It includes specimens not intended to deceive 
collectors, such as the reproductions of the large 
bronze med ds of the Roman Emperors, made by 
Cavino at Padua about 1550, which were merely 
intended to supply amateurs with good imitations 
of works they were not likely to possess in the ori- 
ginals on account of their rarity. It further includes 
much of the later work, deftly made by uncon- 
scientious sculptors, with a view to deceiving 
collectors. Some of these false medals are careful 
copies made from casts. In other cases, the falsifier 
has worked upon an old original, and tried, by re- 
touching it, to make it look like a specimen of some 
much rarer medal. Much of the work of Karl W. 
Becker, a famous, or rather infamous, falsiticator 
of the waning eighteenth century, was also on 


The Imperial Gallery at Vienna has recently 
acquired a picture by Jan van Scorel at the Doro- 
theum — the Viennese Hotel Drouot — where it 
figured as the work of a painter belonging to the 
School of Ratisbon. It represents the Presentation 
in the Temple and discovers a dozen figures in a 
corner ot a Renascence Cupola Church. The High 
Priest behind a side altar has just taken the Christ- 
child and is kissing It. Mary stands before the 
altar, which is surrounded by ministrants, etc. 
In the foreground we see anotlier woman with a 
child on her arm followed by St. Joseph and two 
young girls. The picture, as was discovered 
subsequently, is mentioned by C. van Mander in 
his Schilderboek, who was particularly struck by 
the rich architecture heightened with gold and the 
fine, warm, golden toned coloration. The picture 
possesses especial interest, if the assertion of Hans 
Jantzcn, that it shows us Bramante's Church of St. 
Peter, is really in accordance with facts, as seems 
very likely. Some of the details which Scorel 
paints did not exist in 1522-4 when Scorel lived at 
Rome, and some indeed were never carried out at 
all. But it is not at all unlikely that Scorel was 
very well acquainted with Bramante's plans and 
sketches, since he played a prominent part at the 
X'atican, being a countryman of the then Pope 
Adrian VI. 

The Municipal Gallery of Modern Art at Vienna 


is to lie 'made a slate institution and its scope of 
work widened. Modern Art is to be collected, as 
heretofore, with an eye towards acquiring a fair 
survey of all the important departures in art that 
take place within the Austrian boundaries and 
obtaining every now and then a specially signifi- 
cant specimen of foreign work. Then, however, 
a new department devoted to Austrian Art exclu- 
sively, from the oldest times down to the end of 
the eighteenth century, is to be added. 

Director G. v. Terey has just resigned his post 
at the Print Room in Budapest, to devote himself 
to the picture gallery. Before leaving the 
Print Room he has completed, and published 
in German as well as in Hungarian, a catalogue 
of its treasures. Taking into account the fact 
that the establishment was only founded in 
1 87 1 it has arrived at considerable proportions, 
embracing by this time about 75,000 prints by old 
masters, four thousand modern prints and over 
hve and a half thousand drawings by modern 
masters. The Esterhazy prints, transferred to the 
nation at a time when it bought this nobleman's 
paintings, form the stock of the collection. In 
1902 the painter Charles Delhaes left his prints to 
the institution, and recently the Elisher collection 
of Diirer and Rembrandt prints constituted a 
v.duable addition. 

Two small pictures by Hans Baldung Grien 
have turned up recently. The one, a Madonna, 
dated 15 16, was purchased from a private collec- 
tion at Paris for the Germanic Museum at Nurem- 
berg ; the other was discovered in the Swan 
chapel of the St. Gumbertus's church at Ansbach. 
It is not in prime condition, having been doomed 
to be burnt along with other rubbish, from which 
fate it was prese'rved by the care of the church- 
warden, Mr. Hupp. It discovers the Virgin with 
the Christ child, seated in an open Renascence 
loggia, beyond which we see a garden stocked 
with trees. There is the portrait of a donor to be 
seen kneeling before the Madonna, and behind 
him St. Joseph. The pictu e dates from about 
the same year as the other Madonna. 

In the chapel within the tower of the old castle 
at Boppard on the Rhine, old frescoes, dating from 
about 1370, have been discovered. The castle was 
built 1310-20 by Baudouin of Luxemburg. The 
frescoes represent a Last Judgment, the portrait of 
a bishop (probably Kuno of Falkenstein, 1360-88}, 
and pictures of a number of female saints. 

The galleries of Tietze's Waarenhaus have had a 
show of toys executed by dilettantes, that is, by 
parents for their children and by the children 
themselves for their own use. The latter have 
displayed more ingenuity, skill and taste than the 
loriner, and it is gratifying to notice that they 
betray cjuite plainly the sane influence of the 
modern endeavours to improve the taste of the 
multitude. H. W. S. 




"HY is it that in this 
couiitry national me- 
morials seem con- 
ed to ;' '■ — 
.. loiactior 
are due 

to some ot th<-. best and t 

the human character — : 

love, loyalty. Th 

decided by *'"" ' 

Money is I. 

leading arti 

to br 

the , 


hmmanucl .' 


S( ' 

at .., . 

Albert M 

and glorious , yet who would have 

the courage to make such a statement 

now? It is too early to pronounce an 

opinion upon the memorial to Queen 

Victoria, the lethargic progress of which 

towards completion is only rivalled by 

that of the Vic '^ '' '■ ' • ■[ 

at Rome, The '^ 

has involved th- 

for the proper >. 

and iustlv h<:' 

to a U" '••': y .HI i.s. . ly ' 

the Si 

If there is anything clear and decided 

about the situation, it is that the 

mind expects and demands son- 

and visible counterfeit rcpre- 

the personality which embod. 

the idea of sovereignty, and v 

to sum upfo' 

of history. -• 

what convenient or 

be clothed, will answer thf 

man in the street. 


in the 


.... ...i.CCS tht . .... 

Site is a matter of 

The method adopted 

iSv oi tiie memorial to Queen 

. iL, .,/wc, that of appointing an eminent 

and highly respected member of the 

Royal Academy withou-t any competition 

to execute so important a task, may 

have its merits so far as regards the 

labours of the committee, but can hardly 

be said to have a stimulating effect on the 

artistic energies of the nation. Sculpture 

h. ' ears an art of healthy 

g •■'•• ''■- *^^e 

!S Ot 


not iiourish 



... a V 

'> on 

id in coping with 
rforc them. 

Tut. BVBUXCTON Machine 



"HY is it that in this 
country national me- 
morials seem con- 
demned to give dis- 
satisfaction ? They 
are due in every case 
to some of the best and finest qualities of 
the human character — respect, admiration, 
love, loyalty. They are discussed and 
decided by the best minds obtainable. 
Money is lavished upon them, and the 
leading artists of the day are employed 
to bring them into being. Of such are 
the Albert Memorial at Kensington and 
the National Memorial to King Victor 
Emmanuel at Rome. Of such will be the 
National Memorial to Queen Victoria in 
St. James's Park. By all the laws of art, 
at all events the academical laws, the 
Albert Memorial should have been a great 
and glorious success, yet who would have 
the courage to make such a statement 
now ? It is too early to pronounce an 
opinion upon the memorial to Queen 
Victoria, the lethargic progress of which 
towards completion is only rivalled by 
that of the Victor Emmanuel Memorial 
at Rome. The death of King Edward VII 
has involved the country in fresh schemes 
for the proper commemoration of a great 
and justly beloved sovereign. We confess 
to a feeling almost amounting to panic at 
the situation. 

If there is anything clear and decided 
about the situation, it is that the popular 
mind expects and demands some outward 
and visible counterfeit representation of 
the personality which embodied to them 
the idea of sovereignty, and will continue 
to sum up for future ages a particular period 
of history. No abstract idea, no matter in 
what convenient or benevolent garb it may 
be clothed, will answer the purpose for the 
man in the street. It is not surprising. 

The Burlington Magazine, No. 93 Vol. XVIII.— December, 1910. , 


therefore, that the committee appointed 
to consider a London memorial to King 
Edward VII should have decided in the 
first place upon a statue of the deceased 
monarch. The importance of this decision 
is very great. London is the metropolis, 
not only of England, but of the whole 
British Empire, and though each country, 
each capital city, may decide to have its 
own memorial to the late King, the 
London memorial must partake of the 
nature of a National, and not merely a 
local, monument. 

In these circumstances the choice of 
an artist and a site is a matter of deep 
public interest. The method adopted 
in the case of the memorial to Queen 
Victoria, that of appointing an eminent 
and highly respected member of the 
Royal Academy without any competition 
to execute so important a task, may 
have its merits so far as regards the 
labours of the committee, but can hardly 
be said to have a stimulating effect on the 
artistic energies of the nation. Sculpture 
has been in recent years an art of healthy 
growth and development, not only in the 
United Kingdom, but also in the Colonies. 
It is an art, however, which, owing to its 
conditions of production, cannot flourish 
except under national encouragement. 
There seems to be a happy reaction to-day 
against the petrified human figure on an 
inadequate base, and a nervous and intel- 
ligible shrinking from the presence of 
an eyeless and soulless marble bust. A 
monument to King Edward VII is surely 
one which should call forth imao-ina- 
tive powers in many divers forms, and 
for this reason we would urge that an 
open competition should be inaugurated 
throughout the Empire to ascertain the 
trend of the artist mind in coping with 
such a subject when set before them. 

National Memorials and King Edward VII 

The designs submitted in such a competi- 
tion would without doubt differ vastly in 
idea and in composition. Local considera- 
tions would govern in selection. A design 
excellent in itself might be suitable for 
Calcutta or Cape Town, which would 
be quite unsuitable for the Green Park in 
London, and one suitable for London 
might be out of place at Adelaide. We 
have no right to do more than make 
suggestions, but the question of site is one 
of peculiar interest for our readers. It has 
been a besetting sin with us to crowd our 
sculptured memorials into as close a neigh- 
bourhood as possible. The assembly of 
stone figures in Parliament Square had 
grown sojridiculous that even the London 
conscience rebelled, and placed the memo- 
rial to Gladstone elsewhere. The row of 
similar figures on the Thames Embank- 
ment not only fails entirely from a decora- 
tive point of view, but produces an effect 
both melancholy and depressing. It has 
been suggested that the memorial statue to 
King Edward VII should be placed in 
the Green Park. The space, however, of 
which the Green Park forms a portion is 
already occupied centrally by the Memo- 
rial to Queen Victoria, and a second 
memorial in actual sight of the first 
would not only conflict from the spectator's 
point of view, but must of necessity end 
in one memorial being regarded as of 
greater importance than the other. A 
much more distinguished and conspicuous 
place for a memorial to King Edward 
would be on the high ground of Hyde 
Park towards Marble Arch, a place of more 
popular resort perhaps than the Green 
Park. Let it be remembered that it is in 
the hearts of the people that the King's 
memory is treasured and revered, not only 
in those of the well-to-do classes in the 
West End. Whereas to her subjects in 

London Queen Victoria was little more 
than a great Idea, King Edward was to 
them a great personal Fact, and this should 
be considered in deciding the site for so 
important a memorial. 

As to a residuary memorial or a more 
general character, many schemes have been 
suggested, mostly of a utilitarian nature. 
Without disparagement of these, we should 
like to add to the list a scheme which 
should be of the widest national and 
imperial interest. The foreigner coming 
to London is often surprised to find no 
central institution where he can study the 
artistic history of the innumerable races 
which make up the British Empire. In 
particular, he must note with surprise that, 
except for the neglected and ill-arranged 
India Museum at South Kensington, we 
have no adequate representation of the 
immense treasures of Oriental art for which 
the nation has for long been responsible. 

King Edward VII's personal interest in 
India and the important development of 
events in the Far East during his reign 
would surely be fittingly remembered by 
the formation of a museum of Oriental 
art. We have already for a nucleus the 
finer objects in the India Museum and 
the results of Dr. Stein's explorations in 
Central Asia. Besides these, the now 
rapidly increasing collection of Chinese 
and Japanese paintings in the Print Room 
of the British Museum demand a greater 
space for their proper display than that 
department can afford. In the matter of 
early Mohammedan art, in spite of our 
immense Mohammedan Empire, we are 
actually behind Germany and the United 
States. But it some such museum as we 
suggest could be formed, an immense 
stimulus would be given to a study that 
should appeal to us more closely than to 
any other European nation. 


BY DR. C. 




{(1632 - 75), commonly called 
'from his place of residence 
Verraeer of Delft, was not a 
fertile artist. He attained the 
age of forty-three, and left — 
I so far as we know — but thirty- 
six paintings, nearly all of very 
small dimensions, while none are particularly 
large, and many contain but one or two figures. 
The French traveller, De Moncony, who visited 
him in 1663, did not find a single picture in his 
studio. There was, in fact, only one for sale, and 
that was at a baker's shop. For this the baker 
asked 300 guilders, although it only contained 
a single figure, and, as De Moncony considered 
6 pistoles (i.e., 54 gulden), quite enough for it, 
he did not buy it. This high price, which would 
reach, or even surpass, the prices then obtained 
by Dow alone, also points to Vermeer's slight 

Now, shortly after Vermeer's death, a consider- 
able number of his pictures are mentioned together 
on three occasions. First, in 1677, twenty-six 
pictures, belonging to his estate, were for sale in 
the hands of the art-dealer and painter, Johannes 
Coelenbier, of Haarlem. Secondly, in 1682, nine- 
teen pictures were left by the painter Jacob 
Abrahamsz Dissius, at Delft. And thirdly, twenty- 
one works were sold in an anonyrnous auction, on 
May i6th, 1696, at Amsterdam. The pictures in 
this auction are the only ones described to some 
extent, the others are not described at all. Since 
most of these pictures can be identified with those 
known to us to-day, and only a few have disap- 
peared, it seems natural that this should also be 
the case with the two first-mentioned groups, and 
that, out of the twenty-six pictures which Johannes 
Coelenbier had in his hands in 1677, nineteen 
were in Dissius's in 1682, and twenty-one in the 
auction in the year 1696. 

The following is the list, with prices, of that 
memorable sale; so far as I know, it has never 
before been published complete in England : — 

Catalogue ok the Auction held at Amster- 
dam ON THE i6th of May, 1696, Priced and 

1. A 

in an extraordinarily skilful 
manner ... ff. 155 (;^i 
10) [Frontispiece]. 

2. A Maid-servaiit pouring out Milk — exceedingly 

good ... fi. 175 (;£i4 IIS. 8d.) (H-d-G 17. 
Now in the Rijksmuseum). 

3. T/ie Portrait oj Vermeei'— in a room, with rich 

accessories, painted in an unusually fine 
style ... fl. 45 (£3 15s. ; H-d-G 8. Now in 
the Czernin Collection). 

Woman weighing Gold — in a case, painted 

and strong 
fl. i=;q (-f^i2 iSs. 4d. ; H-d-G 

7. A 

8. .-I 






Lady playing the Guitar— very well painted 
... fl. 7o"^(_^5 165. 8d. ; H-d-G 26. Now in 
Mr. John G. Johnson's collection in Phila- 

An Inferior — with a gentleman washing his 
hands, with a vista and figures ; painted in a 
skilful and unusual style ... fl.95 {£7 i8s.4d.; 
H-d-G 21. Unidentified). 

An Interior — with a lady at the virginals and 
a gentleman listening ... fl. 80 (£6 I3s.4d. ; 
H-d-G 28. Now at Windsor Castle). 
Lady to idiom a Maid-servant is bringing a 
Letter— R. 70 (^5 i6s. 4d. ; H-d-G 32. Now 
in the Rijksmuseum; or 33, now in Hr. J. 
Simon's collection in Berlin). 
Drunken Maid-servant, asleep behind a table — 
fl. 16 (;^"i 8s. 4d. ; H-d-G 16. Now in Mr. 
B. Altman's collection in New York). 

An Interior icith Revellers — well painted in a 
strong manner ... fl .73 (£6 Is. 8d. ; (H-d-G 
40. Unidentified). 

An interior — with a gentleman making music, 
and a lady ... fl. 81 {£s 15s.; H-d-G 30. 

A Soldier with a Laughing Girl — very fine ... 
fl. 44I (;^3 14s. 2d. ; H-d-G 39. Now in 
Mrs. Josephs's collection in London). 

A Girl making Lace— a. 28 {£2 6s. 8d. ; H-d-G 
II. Now in the Louvre). 

Vieioof Delft, from the South— d. 200 (^"16 

13s. 4d.; H-d-G 48. Now in the Maurits- 


Vieiv of a House in Delft— a. 72^ (£6 os. led.; 

H-d-G 47. Now in the Six Collection in 


View of some Houses— H. 48 (.^4; H-d-G 

49. Unidentified). 

Lady ivriting — very well painted ... fl. 63 

(_£5 5s. ; H-d-G 35. Now in Mr. O. Beit's 

collection. Or 36, now in Mr. J. Pierpont 

Morgan's collection). 

Lady adorning herself— R. 30 (£2 los. ; 

H-d-G 20. Now in the Kaiser Friedrich 

Museum, Berlin). 

Lady playing the Spinet — fl. 42. 10. (;^3 los. 

lod. ; H-d-G 23, 24 or 25. Now m the 

National Gallery, 23 and 25 ; in Mr. O. 

Beit's collection 24). 
A Portrait in an Antique Costume — painted in 

an unusual and skilful manner ... fl. 36 (_^3 ; 

H-d-G 44. Now in the Mauritshuis). 
Another similar Portrait — fl. 17 {£1 8s. 4d.; 

H-d-G 42. Now in the Arenlaerg collec- 
tion, Brussels). 

Pendant to the last— fl. 17 (;^i 8s. 4d. ; 

H-d-G 45. Unidentified). 

This shows that, from amongst the twenty-one 


31. ^ 

32. .4 

33- ^ 
35- ^ 

36. A 

37- ^ 



A Newly Discovered Picture by Vermeer of Delft 

pictures in this auction, fifteen arc identifiable 
with more or less certainty ; and, if we desire to 
trace unknown works by the great master, we 
must first of all turn our attention to those which 
have not j'ct been identified. It is unfortunate 
that several pictures have never come to light 
again since that auction. Thus (No. 5), the 
Gaitlanan Washing his Hands ; (No. 9) the 
Interior with Revellers; (No. 10) the Gentleman 
and Lady making Music ; and (No. 40) the 
companion to the Head of a Woman (No. 39), 
belonging to the Due d'Arcnberg, have never 
since appeared in the market — nor, indeed, has 
the view of a street (No. 33). It was presumably to the picture (No. 32) in the Six Collec- 
tion, although, considering the mucli lower price 
which it realized (48 gulden, as compared with 
72^, it must have been smaller, or inferior, or less 
well-preserved. On the other hand, I fancy that 
copies in water-colour of this picture may still 
exist, with the help of which we might, perhaps, 
some day gather an idea of the original, and be 
enabled to trace it. Such copies were made at 
the beginning of the nineteenth century by 
A. Biondgeest and G. Lamberts. The original 
was, therefore, still known at that time, probably 
in Amsterdam, or anyhow in Holland ; unless 
these artists should have mistaken a street scene 
by jacobus Vrele for a Vermeer. Initially, the most 
favourable conditions existed regarding our chances 
of re-discovering a lost picture not mentioned 
hitherto — that is" No. i of the sale catalogue, A 
Woman WdghingGo\d,'^-^\n\.tA in an extraordinarily 
artistic and strong manner — because this picture 
turned up repeatedly, first of all in Holland, where 
it realized 113 gulden in 1701, and 235 gulden in 
1777, then apparently at Munich, where it rose to 
800 florins in 1826, and finally in France, since it 
can be traced to the Lapeyriere and Casimir 
Perier Collections. At the public sale of the 
last-named collection (London, 1848), it was 
re-purchased by the son of the late owner for 

In order to trace this picture it was essential to 
find out whether it was still in the possession of 
the family, and, if so, which member owned it. 
I undertook this research and succeeded in the 
summer of the present year in identifying the 
picture in the collection of the Comtesse de Segur, 
sister of the late President Casimir Perier. The 
picture which is reproduced here [FRONTISPIECE] 
represents a lady standing, seen to the knees after 
the manner characteristic of Vermeer. Her atten- 
tion is concentrated on weighing gold, or possibly 
on testing the accuracy of her scales, for the 
purpose of weighing the pearls lying before her on 
the table; thus the picture is also mentioned by the 
title of A Woman Weighing Pearls. She is wearing 

a dark blue velvet jacket lined with ermine, and 
a red and yellow striped under-jacket, which is 
scarcely visible. The table cover, which is thrown 
carelessly back, is of a dark blue material, and the 
window curtain is an orange-yellow. On the 
wall hangs a picture representing the Last judg- 
ment, by a hand as yet unknown. It is kept in a 
low tone like the 'Golgotha' by Jacob Jordaens, in 
the allegorical picture by that artist in Dr. Bredius's 
collection, and forms an interesting background 
for the graceful head of the lady. The principal 
effects of colour are produced by contrast of 
the whites of the head-dress and ermine against 
the flesh tones, and of the brighter blue of the 
jacket against the darker blue of the table-cover. 
The slight yellow and reddish tints of the costume 
and curtain add a warm note to the cool blues 
and greys of the general colour-scheme. Vermeer 
has followed his usual practice of placing the 
composition in the extreme corner of an apart- 
ment, with a window on the left, through 
which the bright light falls on the figure and the 
wall. Of equally common occurrence in his 
pictures is the black and white tiled floor. The 
face of the woman is of extreme charm, although 
her eyes are downcast. The treatment is delicate - 
and of great distinction, whilst the carefully- 
modelled hands remind one of those of No. 7, 
A Woman Wriling a Letter, in Hr. J. Simon's 
collection in Berlin. In the painting itself we 
notice little of the dotted treatment characteristic 
of Vermeer's early works. Most nearly related 
to it is No. 36, A Young Woman Placing a 
String of Peails ronnd her Neck, in the Kaiser 
Friedrich Museum in Berlin. Proofs of the high 
estimation in which The Woman Weighing Gold 
was held, even so early as 1696, are the facts that 
it was kept as a most precious possession in a 
folding cabinet or shrine ; that it figured as No. i in 
the auction ; and finally, that it realized the price of 
155 guldens, the third highest price of all Vermeer's 
pictures then offered for sale. The famous Viczv 
of Delft, No. 31, and The Milkmaid, No. 2, only 
realized more — that is to say, 200 and 175 guldens 
respectively — whilst of No. 5, A Gentleman 
Washing his Hands, the artistic quality of which 
we cannot now judge, since the picture is lost, 
realized but 95 guldens, and a masterpiece like the 
Czernin picture, No. 3, only brought the modest 
sum of 45 guldens. Some years ago in my 
Catalogue Raisonne I described the Czernin 
picture, without knowing where it was, as No. lO, 
guided by the Perier Sale Catalogue, then the only 
available source of information. In my description 
I made two regrettable mistakes, and should like 
to use this opportunity of correcting them : the 
picture is not signed and is not painted on wood, 
but on canvas. 







HE remarkable portrait, which 
by the kindness of the owner, 
Signer Virzi, is here produced, 
has given rise among the 
few connoisseurs who have 
hitherto seen it to several 
divergent opinions. There 

can be no question that this 

is a remarkably good example of early sixteenth 
century Italian portraiture. The person repre- 
sented is apparently a physician, since he wears a 
doctor's cap and has open in front of him a large 
folio, which, by the inscription on a corresponding 
volume behind him, is seen to be the 'Works of 
Avicenna ' ; he leans forward towards the spectator 
in an attitude at once pensive and alert, while 
with his two hands he caresses the little dog 
that stands upon the open book ; in the back- 
ground is seen a mirror which reflects the 
sitter's back and a companion, with whom he 
is apparently engaged in conversation. The 
background is of a beautiful warm grey, the robe 
an intense earth-red, the flesh colour is warm 
and glowing, and the whites tend slightly towards 
warmth. What strikes one at once in looking at 
the picture is the attempt at psychological por- 
traiture: there is a delicacy and sensibility in the 
handling of the features, in the regard of the 
eyes, and in the placid mouth, which indicates an 
artist who studied portraiture deeply. The attribu- 
tion to Raphael which Signor Virzi, the owner, 
upholds in a pamphlet, which is kindly submitted 
to me on the eve of publication, is based upon an 
undoubted resemblance to the works of the Roman 
School, in the full rounded modelling of the 
features and the general amplitude of the form, 
with a resultant condensation in the composition. 
The whole action of the figure, with the large 
sleeve coming forward towards the spectator, is 
strongly reminiscent of certain portraits either by 
Raphael or done under his influence; in particular 
one may allude to the portrait of Carondelet and 
his Secretary by Sebastiano del Piombo. Signor 
Virzi also maintains the attribution to Raphael 
by an exhaustive examination of all the early 
sixteenth-century artists of Italy, in which he 
summarizes the points of difference between this 
and every other artist but Raphael. He endea- 
vours also to substantiate the claim by the sugges- 
tion that the person represented is a certain 
medical man, by name Andrea Turini, who was a 
professor at the University of Pisa, and afterwards 
was called to the Pontifical Court. He was the 
brother of Baldassare Turini, who is known to 
have had relations with Raphael at the Papal Court. 
It appears that the age of the man represented in 
our portrait agrees well with that of Andrea 
Turini, and if the claim to Raphael's authorship 
could be established without question, it would 

certainly become a likely guess at the personality 
of the man portrayed ; but there is nothing in this 
hypothesis of sufficient certainty to justify its use 
as an argument in favour of Raphael's authorship. 
Another name that has been suggested is that of 
Sebastiano del Piombo ; naturally enough, in 
view of the fact that the portrait seems to combine 
certain Raphaelesque characteristics with a general 
atmosphere of Venetian colouring. 1 am bound 
to admit that at first sight what struck me most 
were the evidences of the Roman tradition in the 
forms of the features, and the closely packed com- 
position, as well as the action and placing of the 
hands ; the red of the robe, too, seemed to me to 
have something of a Roman dulness and heaviness, 
but subsequent examination has convinced me that 
the colour scheme belongs properly to Venetian art, 
and in the relation of the lighted and shaded parts 
of the robe, there is none of that degradation of 
local colour which almost all the Roman artists 
employ. The flesh, too, though it is warm, has not 
the peculiar brick-red note of Raphael's scholars, or 
even of Raphael himself, in those pictures like the 
Santa Cecilia, which Signor Virzi would bring mto 
close connexion with this. Then, again, the full, 
fat, pastose handling suggests to me a Venetian 
artist, and in fact would indicate one Venetian 
artist in particular, whose name was first suggested 
to me by Dr. Borenius, viz., Lorenzo Lotto. It 
is of course well known that Lotto came at one 
time under Raphael's influence, and was probably 
actually in Rome about 1512. It would not of 
course be possible to place this picture at so 
early a date as that, but, as Mr. Berenson has 
pointed out, reminiscences of Raphael continue 
to persist to a later date. It is only fair, however, 
to admit that in no other portraits by Lotto do there 
occur instances of a hand so essentially Raphael- 
esque as this ; approaches towards it there are, 
as, for instance, in the Portrait of a Lady in 
the Cararra Gallery, at Bergamo, in the Bridal 
Couple at Madrid, and in the Odoiii at Hampton 
Court. As a rule, however, Lotto's hands are 
much flatter, less solidly modelled and less 
well drawn than these. If as I suspect this 
picture may indeed be a masterpiece by Lotto 
of unusual power and directness, it would have 
to be placed in point of date not far from the 
Andrea Odoni itself, i.e., in the neighbourhood of 
1527. With the Odoni with its full forms, its salient 
masses and its compact composition, this picture 
has strong points of resemblance. The actual 
handling of the paint, the frank use of impasto 
without scumblings, glazings or careful pre- 
parations, remind us of a particular phase of 
Lotto's constantly varying art which is best ex- 
emplified in a portrait belonging to Mr. George 
Blumenthal of New York, of which, unfortunately 
I believe no reproduction has been published. 


A Portrait attributed to Raphael 

Peculiarly Lottesque seems (o inc the delicate and 
yet solid painting of the white shirt round the 
neck, of the label to the book, and the white hair 
of the dog. One finds m Lotto's work not iin- 
frequcntiy these rather sharp and thin but not 
nnpleasing accents of white. The peculiar sensi- 
bility and the research for the presentment oi 
psychological states which this portrait evinces, 

especially the character of the motxl 
conveyed, all appear to me to be strikingly in 
Lotto's manner, and these considerations make 
me incline to accept this attribution, at all events 
provisionally. If it should be accepted, it would 
show that at one time Lotto emulated Raphael's 
manner even more closely than has been hitherto 


HE recent discoveries made 
in Chinese -Turkestan are 
going to have the effect of 
modifying on more than one 
point the idea which we 
were able to form before of 
the constitution of Buddhism 
and Buddhist art in the P'ar 
East. On the first appearance of the rare religious 
works of the great period, which made their way 
to Europe among prints and bric-a-brac, the tine 
sense of certain connoisseurs at once discerned, 
in these formulae of ancient Japan, something 
which was not oriental. Thus we talked without 
further consideration of the Aryan type of the 
divinities, of Western influences, of an Indian 
origin. The vague principles thus established 
became a sort of law uniformly accepted — a cliche 
all the more generally repeated, because there 
was nothing else to say. It was a triumph when 
the studies pursued in the Greco-buddhist art of 
the Gandhara defined the importance of the 
Hellenistic element in the constitution of Buddhist 
art in the north-west of India. Nothing was left 
for China and Japan ; Buddhism had been the 
great initiator, had taught the whole of the Far 
East to emerge from its prosaic path, had taught 
it the art of the figure and the speculations of 
' Aryan thought ' ! 

If the authors of these lucubrations had known 
even a little about the sources, they would have 
taken good care not to talk in this way. The 
Chinese texts instruct us, in a precise manner, con- 
cerning a complex aesthetic of which they give 
us principles pre-supposing long centuries of 
culture. Further, from the day on which the 
British Museum was enriched with the painting 
of Kou K'ai-Tche, we have had in Europe a 
precise document on Chinese art at the end of the 
fourth century ; that is to say, before we witnessed 
the appearance of the first monuments of Buddhist 
art in China. Moreover, the intrinsic study of 
the bas-reliefs of the Gandhara shows us the 
methods of Hellenism placed at the disposal of 
1 Translated for the author. 

Buddhism ; but if, as Griinwedel pointed out so 
clearly, the plastic was Greek, the inspiration was 
purely Indian. The types thus established fur- 
nished the model for representation in the whole 
body of Buddhist art, as far as Java to the South 
and Japan to the East ; but such a voyage is not 
accomplished without the working of profound 
modifications. If we take the Greco-buddhist 
art of the Gandhara at its point of departure in 
north-western India, we must ask ourselves what 
it lost and what it gained during the long voyage 
which bore it across a whole continent before 
it reached the shores of the Pacific. That is pre- 
cisely the problem which the documents brought 
back by the recent English, French and German 
archaeological explorations are going to enable us 
to solve. 

Monsieur Foucher had already pointed out in 
his fine book on the Greco-buddhist art of the 
Gandhara, that a large number of Iranian motives 
were mingled with the Hellenistic elements. When 
Buddhist art penetrated into Chinese Turkestan, 
it underwent, in the ancient Bactria, upon its 
passage, influences which had already transformed 
it. If the polychrome sculptures in raw and baked 
clay, found throughout the whole of Turkestan 
from Tourfan to Touen-houang, still remain Gand- 
harian in style, the frescos of Mourtong and of 
Idigout Chahri, brought back by the German 
Missions, reveal a different art. New iconographic 
types were constituted ; the gods of Hinduism 
penetrated en masse and in successive batches into 
the Pantheon of northern Buddhism ; influences 
coming from eastern Asia were exercised, and also 
that Chinese influence, so powerfully revealed at 
Touen-Houang, which had already acted on the 
sculptures of Yun-Kang and of Long-men. 

The sculptures of Yun-Kang, like those of Long- 
men, were systematically registered by Edouard 
Chavannes in 1907, He has recently published 
them in the two volumes of his ' Mission Archeo- 
logique en Chine,' which have already appeared. 
They date from the fifth century and do not extend 
beyond it. Their filiation, however, follows in the 
sculptures of Long-men, which continue them in 


a >5 

(- o 

2 o - 

s a u 

D 2 5 

D a J 

a H o< 


■n K 

<< ti] 

Buddhist Art in the Far East 

the sixth century and, with some rare exceptions, 
end in the eighth. Monuments of a Gandharan 
character are not wanting in Yun-Kang. Such are, 
first, the great nimbed Buddhas, which throughout 
Buddhist art will preserve the type established in 
the Gandhara ; then there are the figures of the 
Boddhisattvas seated on a sort of antique folding 
chair, their legs crossed one in front of the other 
in a characteristic attitude. It is interesting to 
notice that this purely Gandharan pose has totally 
disappeared in the works executed in the time of 
the T'ang Dynasty. At Yun-Kang are also found 
those models of chapels or viltdms, carved so as 
to constitute the ornaments of niches, and so 
generally used in the art of the Gandhara. But 
at Yun-Kang the model is no longer understood, 
it has become debased under foreign accretions. 
We thus catch sight of it in the process of its 
disappearance. Similarly the scenes of The Life 
of Buddha utilize Gandharan prototypes, but 
deform them, and do not understand their elements. 
We find ourselves in the presence of a waning 
influence, not of an art in its full youth, stimulating 
the formation of new types. 

If this is so, a certain place must be reserved for 
Chinese influence. Why did the sculptors of 
Yun-kang and Long-men forget the Gandharan 
models if it was not that they were too distant ? 
They are by no means the degenerate descendants 
of artists formed in the Hellenistic workshops, 
who never appeared in these places ; they are the 
vigorous descendants of the artizans who sculp- 
tured the bas-reliefs of the Han period, in Chan- 
tong and Sseu-tali'ouenn, and also of the artists 
similar to that Ssouen-tsong who sculptured the 
lion of Won-Leang-tseu, in the second century. 

These conclusions are confirmed, if the grottoesof 
Long-men are compared with the documents from 
Touen-houang. In those grottoes, in which all 
the subjects are devoted to Buddhist iconography, 
and in which, consequently, the types and costumes 
of the divinities, preserved by religious tradition, 
constantly recall their Indian origin, we find pro- 
cessions of donors among which we must pause. 
We meet with them in the grottoes laid out by 
Tai, king of Wei, in the year 642, for the benefit of 
his mother, who died in 636. The development 
of these processions certifies a purely Chinese 
style [Plate, II]. They call for comparison with 
the p'ainting by Kou K'ai-tche.^ Here are the 
same costumes, and the same drawing in the 
harmonious folds of the stuffs, in the attitude and 
carriage of the figures, in the expression of the 
faces, even in the manner in which the head- 
dresses are placed on the heads. Here, we see the 
unity of development in Chinese art of the fourth 
to the seventh century, and if now we return to the 
documents from Touen-houang, we shall see that 

2 See The Burlington Magazine, Vol, iv, p. 39 (January, 

the power of Chinese art is there categorically 

In fact, on the banners brought back by both 
Stein's and Pelliot's Missions we find representa- 
tions of those scenes from the life of Buddha 
which the art of the Gandhara repeated in profu- 
sion. But here, the figures of the Buddha himself 
wear the Chinese costume ; it is only the divinities 
actually worshipped who do not appear under the 
species of Chinese magistrates. The lay art of 
China possessed itself of Indian subjects, and far 
from borrowing their style, reproduced them in its 
own manner. It must have possessed at this 
period a great power of expansion and have been 
strongly organized to resist to this point the 
efforts of a foreign art to impose its formulae 
and even its expression on the subjects of Indian 

If we enter into detail, we find other argu- 
ments for affirming the strong constitution of 
Chinese art at this epoch. In fact, the edifices 
which represent it exhibit here an architecture 
which we know in Japan under the name of the 
style of Nara. A specimen of it is even found on 
one of the frescoes of Mourtoug. Elsewhere, in 
the scene of The Life of Pleasure oi (^akeya-Mouni, 
we see women playing on musical instruments 
similar to those which we find in the famous 
Treasure of the Shyouoiu, given to this temple in 
the eighth century by a pious emperor. This 
shows that the source of this architecture is in 
China, and that from China it spread, at the same 
period, on the one side westward as far as 
Turkestan, and on the other eastward, as far as 

Buddhist iconography also derives new elements 
from the religious documents of Touen-houang. 
We find among them, in a painting of the Stein 
Mission, the subject of Jizo represented as Master 
of the Six Worlds of Desire, and in the large 
embroidery at present exhibited in the British 
Museum, the subject of Ami Aliaba (Amida) 
rising from the mountains, between Avalokatesvan 
(Kuannon) and Maliastuma (Seichi). These two 
subjects were considered until now purely 
Japanese. They appeared at the moment when 
the priest Eishin introduced those new formulae 
which were to modify so profoundly the postu- 
lates of Buddhist art in Japan. We see that 
they are of distant origin and that the prototypes 
are to be found at Touen-houang. There is no 
doubt that this last subject, which remains peculiar 
to Japan— the Amida descending from the skies, 
accompanied by the twenty-five Bodhisattvas — will 
be discovered some day in the pictorial documents 
of Chinese Turkestan. 

Such, in their general lines, are the first con- 
clusions to be drawn from the documents brought 
by the German, English and French Missions. 
We see that they are of a nature to modify the too 


Buddhist Art in the Far East 

absolute idea which we had of the role of Buddhist 
art in the Far East. On the one side, in Japan, 
Buddiiism appeared as the great initiator and tiie 
great creator of art. Even the motives which we 
had beheved until now to belong especially to the 
island empire, originated far away from it. But 
on the other side we see that in China Buddhist 
art encountered a well-established tradition of art, 
whicli, as at Touen-houang, was strong enough 

to impose itself entirely. Therefore we now per- 
ceive the nature of the changes introduced into 
Buddhist art during its long voyage across Asia. 
When it reached Corea and then Japan, it was 
not following only its Indian or Hellenistic bent ; 
it had been profoundly modified by contact with 
China. To the great intellectual values which 
China placed at the service of Indian doctrine we 
must now add the contributions of its art. 



MOXGST the frescoes painted 
about 1332-1338 by Taddeo 
Gaddi in the Baroncelli Chapel 
in Santa Croce, at F^lorence, is 
one representing the Virgin 
going up the Temple steps 
[Plate I, a]. The building at 
the top of them was evidently 
considered something of an achievement by the 
artist, for he repeated it in the Rtjeci'ion of Joachim's 
Offering in the same series. The same building 
was copied by other artists more or less accurately. 
It appears in one of Agnolo Gaddi's Holy Cross 
frescoes and in one of Giovanni da Milano's in the 
Rinuccini Chapel (c. 1379), both in Santa Croce ; 
also in a fresco in the Bocchineri Chapel in the 
Cathedral at Prato, in a predella panel by Mariotto 
di Nardo in the Florence Academy, and in a 
well-known drawing in the Louvre, as well as 
in the Chantilly Trh riches Hetires by the Van 
Limbourgs, here reproduced [Plate 1, b], and 
again from a different point of view in the 
same MS. Three of these repetitions are very 
closely connected together and with the original ; 
these are the Louvre drawing, Giovanni da Milano's 
fresco, and the Chantilly miniature. The Louvre 
drawing [Plate I, c] is, I think, obviously a 
student's copy, done from the original fresco, and 
by no possibility a study for it. 

In the original the staircase is divided into three 
sets of degrees, whereof the steps of the middle 
group are intended to be at right angles to those 
above it and below. In the three derivatives all 
the steps are parallels. In the original the Virgin's 
right arm is extended ; in the derivatives it falls 
by her side and carries something. The Giovanni 
da Milano fresco is differentiated from the others 
by the positions of the children at the foot of the 
steps, and may be left out of further account. It 
is tempting to suggest that the Louvre drawing 
may have been the intermediary between the 
original fresco at Florence and the miniature 
painted in the north of Europe by one of the 
brothers Van Limbourg. Some copy the minia- 

turist must have had before him. Unfortunately, 
the miniature agrees with the fresco in the gesture 
of the child with a foot on the lowest step, and 
differs from the drawing. The dependence of the 
miniature on the fresco itself thus seems certain, 
and it is most natural to conclude that the painter 
of the miniature had actually studied the fresco in 
situ, and brought away with him a sketch of it, 
which he afterwards used as foundation for his 
miniature painted at home. That he had steeped 
himself in the traditions of the later Giottists is, 
moreover, proved by several other of his minia- 
tures in the ' Tres riches Heures.' 

If we are thus enabled to infer that this one of 
the Van Limbourg brothers visited Florence, an 
existing document demonstrates his presence in 
Milan. Milan, of course, was a city which a 
Franco-Flemish art-student would be likely to 
visit. He would almost necessarily pass through 
it on his way to Florence. Milan was hospitable 
to northern artists. Jacques Cone was employed 
there on the cathedral in 1399. Van Limbourg's 
visit must have been paid a year or two earlier, 
during the lifetime of an artist named Giovannino 
de' Grassi who was employed in the cathedral 
works. The known facts about him and his 
volume of drawings, to which I must now pass on, 
will be found in ' L'Arte' for 1905 at page 332, to 
which the reader is referred. Suffice it to say that 
he was an all-round artist — sculptor, painter, and 
miniaturist — and that he died in 1398. His em- 
ployers put it on record that he was a man whose 
word could be trusted. 

In the town library of Bergamo there is a book 
of studies on vellum, on one page of which is 
inscribed in writing of about 1400 the name of 
this same Giovannino, and there is little reason to 
doubt that at least most of the drawings were done 
by him.' T here are, indeed, at the end of the book 
some half-dozen designs for heraldic wall decora- 
tion which have rather a different look. These 

I Since this was written Mr. Sidney Colvin has shown me 
photographs of the pages of another book of animal drawings 
on vellum by the same hand as the Bergamo volume. 


(\) the presf.n'tation of the vircin, i'.v t.muifo (.adni 
i;arcixcei,i,i chapel, sta. ci;iice, ei.orence 








a 7. 
c > 


Giovannino de* Grass! and the Brothers Van Limbourg 

designs seem to be connected with Gian Galeazzo 
Visconti, and there are reasons for supposing that 
they may have been made in 1395, on the occasion 
of his coronation as Duke, and perhaps for the 
decorations tlien put up. I ought to have men- 
tioned that the book belonged at a later date to 
Lorenzo Lotto, who inscribed his monogram on 
most or all of the leaves with the date 1542, The 
drawings in this book, which now interest us, 
represent animals, somewhat in the style after- 
wards improved by Pisanello. There are also a 
few charming costume studies, a ' wild man,' and 
so forth. I was only able to see the book for ten 
minutes, but during that time my attention was 
caught by a drawing of a wild boar brought down 
by dogs [Pl.^te II, a], which I instantly recog- 
nized as the original of the central group of the 
Halltili till Saiiglicr in the 'Trds riches Heures' of 
Chantilly. Of this page a photograph was for- 
tunately procurable, and is here reproduced 
[Plate II, b], A glance proves the dependence 

of the miniature on the drawing. The only differ- 
ences in the two designs are the changes which 
the miniaturist had to make in order to introduce 
the three huntsmen. Giovannino's drawing is 
evidently the original. 

It seems to follow from this observation that the 
Van Limbourg who painted the Hallali had worked 
under Giovannino de'Grassi at Milan, and had had 
access to this particular volume of animal studies, 
out of which he copied the drawing of the boar 
and dogs, and took his copy home with him. 

Further careful examination of the manuscript 
may be expected to yield other instances of copy- 
ing, and thus throw more light upon the artistic 
development of the most interesting of the three 
brothers Van Limbourg. Enough, however, is 
here revealed to show the aptness of the descrip- 
tion ' Ouvrage de Lombardie ' as applied to the 
new style of manuscript-decoration introduced 
into the north of Europe about the end of the 
fourteenth century. 


)T Hampton Court Palace, in a 
room containing chiefly paint- 
gs by Netherlandish artists 
I of the sixteenth and seventeenth 
I centuries, there will be found 
' three small paintings or panels, 
which bear the name of Lucas 
iVan Leyden. Genuine paint- 
ings by Lucas are so rare that it is worth while to 
inquire into the history of these three pictures, 
which evidently form part of a series, being all 
painted on panels, and about the same size, 20 ins. 
high by 14^ or 15I ins. wide. 

These three pictures were part of the collection 
of King Charles I, who acquired them by purchase 
from Sir James Palmer. They are entered in 
Vander Doort's catalogue (Bathoe's Edition, 1757), 
as follows : — 

'No. 35. Done by Lucas Vanleyden, bought of 
Sir James Palmer ; being the first of the 
three pieces. 

Item. — Another piece where Joseph in a 
white habit, his hands tied, and brought 
before a judge ; in a black ebony frame, 
painted upon the right light. — if. 8.-if. 

' No. 39. Done by Lucas Vanleyden. 

Item. — The second of the third and last 
pieces of Lucas Vanleyden, where one 
is lying in a green bed a dying, and 
another kneeling at the bed's feet, and 
some standing at the bed-side ; in a 

black ebony frame. These two pieces 
aforesaid of Lucas Vanleyden, were 
bought by the King of Sir James Palmer ; 
the third and last fellow piece of Van- 
leyden is removed at this time to the 
chair-room, painted upon the right light. 
If. 8.-if. 2i.' 

The third picture is catalogued in the chair-room 
aforesaid : 

'No. I. By Lucas Van Leyden. 

Item. — The second in a black ebony 
frame of Lucas Van Leyden where Saint 
Sebastian stands tyed to the stump of a 
tree to be shot at. 

Note. — This should follow No. 38, page 
II, and No. 39 should be called the 
third and last of Lucas Van Leyden.' 

King Charles evidently liked such paintings by 
Lucas Van Leyden, for he also owned a small 
painting of St. Jerome, ' being one of the five pieces 
which the State's Ambassador gave to the King at 
St. James's, 1635,' and a painting from the Mantua 
Collection of Chess-players, which is probably the 
painting now in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum at 
Berlin. Moreover at the disposal of the King's 
collection by the Parliament the three pictures in 
question seem to have been highly esteemed, since 
they were appraised as ' Three pieces of St. Sebas- 
tian by Lucas Van Leyden' at ;^ioo and sold to 
Mr. Wright on 26th May, 1650, for ;^"ioi. They 
were, however, recovered for the royal collection. 



Notes ofj Pictures in the Royal QoUectioris 

and reappear in the catalogue of paintings which 
belonged to King James II. 

The three paintings have many of the character- 
istics of Lucas Van Leyden's work, crowded com- 
position, grotesque costume and especially the high 
comical caps, with realistic studies from human 
models. They are thinly painted in very bright 
colours, and, as might be expected, have suffered 
a good deal from injury and neglect, though not 
apparently from restoration. A very obvious 
weakness in drawing has led to the doubt whether 
the paintings can lie credited to the hand of so 
skilled an artist as Lucas Van Leyden himself, but 
in other details the hand of a practised master can 
be discerned, so that the paintings may be con- 
sidered as not altogether unworthy of their 

Dr. Franz Di'ilberg, who has made a profound 
study of the Dutch paintings of this period, has 
been kind enough to communicate his critical 
opinion to The Burlixgton Magazine. Allud- 
ing to the defects in the drawing Dr. Diilberg 
suggests the possibility of the artist being really 
Dirk Huygensz, the brother of Lucas, and classifies 
the Hampton Court pictures with A Minister 
Preaching in the Rijksmuseum at Amsterdam 
[Plate, d] and a Crncifixion in the Museo Civico 
at Verona, the latter described by Dr. Dulberg in 
his ' Friihhollandern in Italien.' Nothing, however, 
seems to be known of Dirk, except that he was a 
painter, and, on the whole. Dr. Diilberg seems 
inclined to leave the attribution to Lucas Van 
Leyden, as it has been since the days of King 
Charles I. 

Taking the three pictures here reproduced 
that representing the Mariyrdoni of St. Sebastian 
[Plate, a] gives a fairly commonplace rendering 
of the subject. The figures are, however, character- 
istically Dutch. The children in the foreground 
mocking the saint can hardly belong to any artist 
but Lucas Van Leyden, although the figures of the 
archers seem hardly worthy of him. The group 
of elders and the landscape in the background are 
also quite in Lucas's manner. The next subject 
[Plate, b] has been variously interpreted. In 
one case, where it was looked upon as a pendant 
to the St. Sebastian, it has been described as St. 
Sebastian brought before the Roman magistrate. 
Another version could see in it Joseph brought 
before the judge in Egypt, an explanation probably 
due to the fact that Lucas did paint a series of 
paintings illustrating the story of Joseph. It seems 
possible, however, that the scene is one taken from 
Roman History representing the young Manlius 
brought for judgment before his father, Titus 
Manhus Torquatus, whose refusal to remit a death 
sentence, even in the case of his own son, was 
often chosen as a recognised type of justice and so 

depicted in symbolical pictures of this nature and 
period. This painting is thoroughly characteristic 
in its details of Lucas Van Leyden, and, if further 
evidence be wanting, tlie signature L can be traced 
on the cartouch which hangs on the wall at the 
back of the picture. 

The third subject [Plate, c] has hitherto escaped 
elucidation. It is, perhaps, the one which can be 
attributed most certainly to Lucas Van Leyden. 
This deathlied scene may, however, be identified 
with the subject known as the Communion of 
Ucrkcnbald, especially since the story of Herken- 
bald was one of the types chosen in the Middle 
Ages, like the story of Manlius, to symbolize the 
idea of justice. The legend of Herkenbald, the 
judge, is shortly this : The nephew of Herkenbald 
seduced a young woman, and was struck down 
dead by his uncle, the judge. On his deathbed 
Herkenbald, though urged to repent of this 
murder, refused to do so ; whereupon the sacred 
wafer issued of its own accord from the ciborinm 
in the bishop's hands, and laid itself on the tongue 
of the dying man. 

This legend is to be found in tapestry, and was 
evidently very popular.' 

It is difficult, however, to explain the scene in 
the background where a man is destroying an 

This third picture had been detached from the 
other two, and was found at Buckingham Palace, 
whence it was removed in 1901 to join the other 
two at Hampton Court. 

The painting of A Minister Preaching, in the 
Rijksmuseum at Amsterdam, of which, through 
the kindness of Jhr. B. W. F. van Riemsdyk, the 
director, we are able to give a reproduction here, 
has so many points of resemblance with the 
Hampton Court paintings, that they cannot help 
being classified together. The Amsterdam paint- 
ing shows, however, a surer and more practised 
handling than those at Hampton Court, and seems 
worthier of a painter whose repute was so great as 
that of Lucas Van Leyden. The Amsterdam paint- 
ing is nearer also to the far superior paintings of 
The Chess-Players, at Berlin, and The Card-Players, 
in the collection of the Earl of Pembroke at 
Wilton, the latter of which has been finely repro- 
duced in Capt. Nevile Wilkinson's book on the 
pictures at Wilton House. 

We understand that, in addition to the researches 
already made by Dr. Dulberg, an exhaustive study 
of the paintings attributed to Lucas Van Leyden 
is being prepared by Dr. Beets. It is to be hoped, 
therefore, that more light may be thrown by him 
on the three interesting little paintings at Hampton 
Court Palace. 

' See Joseph Destree, Maitre Philippe. Vromont and Cie. 
Brussels, 1904. 




M 'i'^: \ rus (?) 










'E are sufficiently well- 
informed concerning Van 
Gogh's manner of crea- 
tion, even if his works did 
not bespeak clearly enough 
the nature of their origin. 
The artist has often told 
us in his letters how he 
worked. He is an Impressionist in the fullest 
sense of the word, the complete opposite of Gauguin. 
The marvel is, however, that through the volcanic 
process of his creation, he arrived at a sort of 
synthesis, which, for its inner strength, is quite 
comparable with that of the other French masters 
who were in pursuit of the solution of similar 
problems. Beside Cezanne his art is lasting, for 
it set conscious limitations before him at the very 
outset, whereas Cezanne tortured himself with his 
deep meditations. Van Gogh surpasses Gauguin's 
cleverly-calculated synthesis by the originality of 
his temperament, and Seurat died too young to 
enable us to regard the few works which he left 
behind him as a definite formula of what he 
could have achieved. 

Van Gogh has described to us how he set out in 
the morning and tried to paint all his pictures 
thoughout, even the largest, direct from Nature. 
He has told us how he braved the cutting mistral 
on the plain of Aries, and how this work was such a 
strain upon him, physically alone, that he expected 
to collapse when once the excitement of creation 
was passed. He tells us distinctly that in a studio 
he can only do assimilative work. For him actual 
creation only proceeds from Nature. Anyone 
who has once witnessed a painter working before 
the face of Nature knows how great an enterprise 
it is to attempt to paint a large picture from 
Nature in a few sittings — much more in one. It 
is true that there are dexterous virtuosi to whom 
nothing is impossible, but the wonder about Van 
Gogh is that, in spite of all the external difficulties 
of close association with Nature, he scarcely ever 
loses himself, and we are never tempted to say 
before his work, ' Here his inspiration failed him ; 
here his production is embarrassed.' 

There are, of course, many unfinished studies, 
but platitude Van Gogh has never uttered. That 
is one of his most astonishing accomplishments. 
Such a result could only be vouchsafed to enor- 
mous strength of spirit. And if in our day quiet 
is denied for quiet measured painting, we may still 
hope that artists of the same spiritual strength as 
Van Gogh's may yet arise. 

Van Gogh has himself described the intensity 

' For the first article see The Burlington Magazine, VuI. 
xviii, pp. 91-99 (October, igio). 
'Translated by H. C. Ferratjy. 

with which he worked : ' I have sometiines worked 
with furious speed. If that is a fault, I cannot help 
myself. For example, in a summer's evening I have 
painted a canvas of ' thirty ' at one sitting. To go 
over it a second time — impossible ! Should I destroy 
it ? Why ? — when 1 deliberately went out in a strong 
north wind in order to paint it. Is it not strength 
of thought far more than quiet brushwork that we 
seek ? And, above all, in such work, produced in 
its primary effect in situ and from Nature, is 
calm and a regulated manner of painting always 
possible ? ' 

Then he speaks of his relation to Nature : — 

' I cannot work without models. Perhaps so I 
rashly turn my back on Nature, but I have a 
terrible fear of losing the correctness of the form. 
Perhaps later, after ten years' study . . . but, 
really and truly, I have such a burning curiosity 
concerning the Possible and the Actual, that I 
have neither the wish nor the courage to seek the 
Ideal which might arise from my abstract studies.' 

These words were written to Gauguin, 

From this kind of creation arises Van Gogh's 
pictorial technique : he must work in broad lines, 
with broad brush-strokes. And out of his technique 
again arises his style. 

Van Gogh endeavours to reproduce Nature. 
But, on the other hand, he does not try, like the 
Impressionists, to give an ardent study of Nature 
in an easel picture separated from its environment ; 
he aims at creating something in his work which 
enters into a living relation with the environment. 
His pictures are not to be curiosities, hung in a 
room, they are to become a part of the room, and 
bring the life and movement of their brilliant 
colours and vigorous lines into the room in 
which they hang. In fact a great decorative 
principle is his main impulse, a principle which he 
did not bring with him from Holland, but learned 
from the young French painters whom he met in 
the shop of Pere Tanguy. 

His colour-sense drove him to study the most 
intense decorative probletns : he had quite new 
ideas for his time. The Impressionists had fought 
for pure colours on the palette ; Van Gogh was 
probably the first to realise the significance of 
pure colours in decorative art. Gauguin had built 
up the same idea theoretically, but it would be 
difficult to decide by which member of this so- 
called group the latent idea was first clearly 

It is interesting to read Van Gogh's pasans of 
the colour yellow. For him, yellow is the colour 
K-ttT e^oxi'iv for the decorative style. He describes 
how his sitting-room at Aries was decorated in 
yellow with brilliant sunflowers. Thus he sought 
a decorative style in which strong colour-chords 
vibrate against each other just as Gauguin taught 
his pupils at Pont Aven to raise every tone to a 


Vincent van Gogh 

yet higher pitcli. Naturally, in following out such 
a scheme of painting, Van CJogh, in a certain sense, 
gradually turned away from realism. His colour 
was boiuid, in following out his decorative idea, 
to be heightened many degrees above reality. 
Naturally," thereupon, he began to regard his 
pictures superticially as two-dimensioned. Every 
painter who is striving for decorative syntliesis 
must reach the point of gradually disregarding tiie 
call to depth and of becoming ' superficial.' More- 
over material substance which can be suggested 
even to the point of illusion, by strong light and 
shade, must be more and more abandoned. 
So Van Gogh arrived at last at a purely carpet-like 
style of work, such as the series of pictures which 
he produced at Auvers, among which a swaying 
cornfield glows with colour under a flood of deep 
yellow siuilight. 

Van Gogh rarely became consciously stylistic. 
We must accept all these so-called transformations 
as unconscious and intuitive. It is only in works 
like the Berceuse— a. picture of a woman which he 
wished to see hung in a seaman's tavern — that 
we find him deliberately simplifying the form 
and working in great smooth colour-planes. The 
idea in popular woodcuts and other naive forms 
of art for the people may well have guided him 
here. Any deliberate symbolic representation is 
also but rarely found in him. We may recall the 
remarkable representation of the disk of the sun, 
to be seen particularly in some of the last pictures 
of the Auvers period. 

In fact. Van Gogh, broadly considered, remained 
an Impressionist, even though his own peculiar 
colour-technique necessarily led him towards 
certain simplifications. Similarly, in form he was 
impelled to strive for a strong condensation and 
to dispense with all unnecessary detail. Never- 
theless he worked vitally in the strongest formal 
syntheses, because his brush-stroke, following the 
movement, the dominating planes and lines of the 
object which he was representing, constructs the 
separate masses, whether they be trees, houses or 
mountains, so to speak, from the centre outwards. 
And so his work from Nature was, in a certain 
sense, synthetic. 

Van Gogh knew well that a picture lacks inner 
power of arrest when certain systems of lines are 
not thoroughly carried through. One is easily 
led to conceive Van Gogh as an artist who let 
himself be guided in his compositions only by 
colour motives. That would represent his art 
somewhat incompletely. Although they are re- 
markably hidden by the colour, strong lines are 
discoverable in Van Gogh's work which give his 
pictures an architectonic structure. My astonish- 
ment was very great when one day I chanced to 
see a picture by Van Gogh — a woman with iier 
child on her lap — through a piece of tissue paper, 
which almost entirely neutralized the colours, and 


only allowed the lines to appear prominently. I 
saw, quite differently from the way in which I 
shoukl have seen in a reproduction, how the 
whole picture was built up first on a firm scaffold- 
ing of closely articulated parallel lines, the splendid 
rhythm of which recalled an almost classical 
scheme of composition. 

What was Van Gogh's attitude towards classical 
art? He lived in a country where the broad clear 
lines must awaken in us all thoughts of Raphael 
and Poussin. Only with difficulty can a modern 
French artist regard this scenery entirely without 
thinking of the classic artists. It was quite other- 
wise with Van Gogh. He remained purely Dutch 
and that is his greatest strength. When he paints 
southern peasants they are peasants living hardly 
by the sweat of their brow ; they have never heard 
of Poussin's Arcadias. Van Gogh remained a 
thorough individualist and resolutely shunned 
everything that might appear similar to classical 
generalization. The painters whom he particularly 
revered are the peasant-painter Millet, Delacroix, 
Daumier and Rembrandt. This selection is very 
characteristic. The pictures which he painted 
from woodcuts during his treatment in the asylum 
at Aries are, almost without exception, based on 
works by these masters. 

As an Individualist and as a Dutchman one 
might suppose Van Gogh to be a portrait-painter, 
able to characterize his sitter incisively. Generally 
speaking, like most Impressionists, he did not 
achieve much in this field, however beautiful the 
pictures may be if we regard them as colour and 
line compositions. The people he painted (for 
instance thefamily of a southern-French postman) 
were to him, so to speak, mere objects of still-life. 
He hardly attempts to penetrate the personality of 
his sitters deeper. They might be chance models. 
The portraits of himself which we know vary in 
quality. Many are purely objective paintings. 
In one work, however, which belonged in 1908 to 
M. Eugen Blot, Van Gogh shows that in this 
field too, he could work wonders. It is a simple 
head, in dominant green-gold tones, but arresting 
in its impression. All the sufferings with which 
the painter had to battle throughout his life 
are stamped on this countenance. We are 
unconsciously reminded of another famous Portrait 
of the Artist, also by a great Dutchman— the 
portrait of Rembrandt in his old age, with the 
white linen cloth. 


We are accustomed, quite rightly, to assign Van 
Gogh to the French school and not to the Dutch. 
He achieved his decisive developments not in 
Holland but in France. In France he found his 
first admirers, while in Holland it was a very long 
time before he began to be recognized, even with 
strong reservations. And yet we should be wrong 


u » 



a ,. 

M to 
O H 

Vincent van Gogh 

if we were to ignore how much that is specifically 
Dutch lives in his art. French art has only come 
in our own time into intimate relationship with 
Nature and landscape. It was in the Fontainebleau 
School that first awoke the deep love of Nature, 
imparted by the English and Dutch, which we 
usually considered a peculiarity of the Teutonic 
race. Certainly artists are to found among the 
Latin races, who seek their inspiration in land- 
scape, but yet these artists — the Salvator Rosas 
and the Claude Lorrains — do not set themselves 
to plumb the soul of Nature, but strive for formal 
beauty, the rhythm of the broad line, the outward 
grandeur of the lines, or of the interplay of light. 
These Latin artists are townsmen who rediscover 
in Nature the thoughts and inspirations of classic 
art. The peasantry and all the realm bound up 
with it for the deeper manifestation of Nature, 
has for them remained far off. 

Van Gogh's intuition of Nature first glowed 
with true ecstatic fire when he discovered southern 
Nature in Provence. It is not the first time that 
Dutchmen have drawn inspiration from the south: 
the seventeenth century saw a large school of 
Dutch artists around Berchem and Karel Dujardin, 
who devoted themselves entirely to the study of 
the south. But none of them could see there the 
depths that Van Gogh saw. This is the novelty 
in his work, that he detected in Nature in Provence 
an appeal common to all men, far deeper than 
the somewhat artifical love of Nature shown by the 
Italianised Dutchmen, and, as we may say, only 
discoverable by a man in whom the deep melan- 
choly of a Ruysdael had revived. 1 he surprise 
about Van Gogh is that to him came, in the 
presence of southern Nature, inward experiences 
which took place, in the greatest Dutch landscape- 
painters before Nature in the North, and so he found 
a lyrical expression of the South such as had 
scarcely been revealed before to any painter. Van 
Gogh, with his deep understanding of colour was 
the one modern artist who succeeeded in identifying 
the decorative quality of the South with his own 

By his spiritual constitution also, Van Gogh 
was fitted to comprehend the South fully. The 
South is not merely serene in its wealth of colour 
and its flood of sunshine. Amid its rich fertility, 
awakes in man the thought of the transitoriness 
of life. It is indeed strange that the northern 
religions, which find enjoyment in labour, in spite 
of their rigid doctrine of duty, generally regulate 
life on optimistic principles ; while the South, 
often apparently idle, takes a firmer speculative 
hold of the significance of life, for it foresees 
nothing beyond enjoyment. Thus in southern 
countries develops a philosophy of the cheerful 
enjoyment of life leading at the end to a painless 
passing into the serener Nature. 

Van Gogh fully understood this view of a happy 

death, but he brings to the consideration of these 
ideas a deeper moral conception. He has always 
sought a higher aim in everything in which he 
interested himself, and always suffered himself to 
be guided by social ideals, which run through his 
life like a scarlet thread. As an art-dealer he 
dreams of a great co-operative union of artists 
which should obtain due recognition for the new 
art of Impressionism and at the same time secure 
for the artists the modest wage which they had 
earned. When he perceives that profit is at the 
root of all art-dealing he abandons that calling, 
and comes to the conclusion that art, and dealing 
in art especially, are unsocial energies, because 
under modern conditions at any rate they must 
always remain closed to the poor. 

Thus he turns, by way of reaction, to the most 
self-sacrificing and social of callings ; he becomes 
a teacher both in Belgium and England, revealing 
the gospel to the poorest. After he recognized 
that here, too, his efforts towards fruitful work 
must still be in vain, broken morally, he turns to 
art, and there at last recovers his spiritual energy. 
His first works, inspired by the peasants of northern 
Holland, revive the social idea in a new form. 
Living dumb among them, sketching and painting, 
he shares the material and spiritual misery of the 
poor, and when he goes to Paris, a great part of 
his distress of mind there may be concerned with 
his art having lost in ,the flood of technical 
problems — in the widest sense of the word — the 
altruistic basis on which it had hitherto stood. 

The works of his Parisian period are without 
any lyrical feeling, either as regards Humanity or 
Nature. This feeling, however, was never extin- 
guished in his soul. In his letters from Provence 
the feeling of Christian fellowship was again 
awakened. Again he searches for the possibility 
of his economic union of the impressionist 
painters, which, in the hope of greater results later 
on, was at least to insure them for the time their 
daily bread. It is touching to see how in the 
extracts from his letters there speaks now the 
picture-dealer, and now again the brooding idealist 
who saw before him as his highest aim the realiza- 
tion with all his friends of a common life in 
Nature without material cares. 

Through the unselfish help of his brother, who 
supported him for years, Van Gogh was able to 
achieve this aim for himself and likewise for 
Gauguin in the South of France. On his return 
there recurs again and again the theme of his 
happiness in the calm of Nature, and how, on 
the other hand, he hopes that in the near 
future his pictures may realize 500 francs, in 
order that he may be no longer dependent on 
his brother, who had made this life possible 
for him. This communistic conception was 
then in the air. The group of artists round 
Gauguin at Pont Aven were filled with similar 


Vincent van Gogh 

thoughts, which were the result of their failure in 
outward success. Van Gogh's pictures at the time 
of his stay in Provence show the deepest expression 
for Nature. He will not look upon Nature in a 
melancholy mood. To do so he should have 
remained in Holland. He knew how to repress such 
thoughts, and oppose to all outward misfortune his 
firm confidence that some day he would be under- 
stood. He had enough to suffer from physical 
weakness, and his letters arc full of complaints of his 
bad health. And yet, but a few lines further on, he 
dreams of the painter who will one day come and 
interpret this blooming landscape of Provence. 
Tiie great painter of the future will not suffer from 
bodify weakness. He would not have false teeth. 
He would be beautiful and beloved, and he would 
enjoy with all his senses this splendour of the soul, 
which Van Gogh can only look upon as a painter. 
Thus the thoughts of Van Gogh lose themselves in 
the optimistic conception of a perfected race of 
artists, in whom art and life will flow together 
harmoniously. Filled with these thoughts. Van 
Gogh dwells more and more upon the idea of 
joyful death which southern Nature had revealed 
to him. He fancies that lie himself bars the way 
to a freer and greater genius, and therefore is 
willing to suffer, to abandon life amid the radiance 
of this Nature. 

Van Gogh's Provencal landscapes are the mani- 
festation of those deep ideas. The thought of a 

joyful death goes hand-in-hand with the highest 
delight in the senses. His works were produced 
in a frenzied tumult of creative force. The glowing 
colour which he set free and all the blaze of 
shimmering yellow and fiery red are the symbolic 
witnesses of that which he sought to imitate by 
intcnsest effort. Then again there was a stillness 
in the distance, a deserted garden, a tumultuous 
beauty of springtime from which he derives a pen- 
sive mood at once joyful and sad, and the thought 
of the happiness of death. ' There behold me in 
my beauty ; but where is he who can taste to the 
full all that my virgin beauty affords ? Soon will 
come the hour in which I shall sink back into the 
universal. Aimless I depart if none regards me 
and none understands— yet what matters it ? In 
endless floods beauty passes, in endless floods 
Nature restores it anew. Gladly then I go to 
death, knowing that if to-day precious beauty 
perish aimless within me, to-morrow the eternal 
cycle of creation will bring to birth more precious, 
more beautiful things, with the like abundance. 
Broad as the bed of the Rhone flows the stream 
of life, endless as the coloured glow of the evening 
sky in the crystal clearness of the southern sun. 
There is the kosmos whence forms arise and into 
which they are lost.' Thus speak the trees, the 
meadows, the plains, the far-glimmering mountains 
and wide heavens of Van Gogh's Provencal 
landscapes ! 


'he album of drawings now 
preserved in the library at 
Knowsley has been known to 
the public since 1842, when 
the Walpole Collections at 
Strawberry Hill were sold. 
In that year, the following 

. ^ ^ ^ account derived from the 

catalogue' appeared in the review, ' Le Cabinet de 
I'amateur,' vol. i, p. 447." 

The first and most precious (object) . . . is an album of 
original drawings by Janet, formerly bclongmg to Bran- 
tome and later to Mariette, %vho wrote this note on the 
inside of the cover : ' Recueil des portraits des princes et 
princesses et des seigneurs et dames qui composaient a 
cour de Francois ler roi de France, a appartenu sans doute 
a Brant6me. Ce qui me le fait prejuger, c'est que plusieurs 
des inscriptions sont ecrites de sa main. Je men suis 
affermi par la confrontation que j'en ai faite avec un 
manuscrit authentique tout corrige de la main de ce cclebie 
ecrivain " These portraits are all in black chalk touched 
with red. Among them are some notable personages: 
Francis I, Louise de S.ivoie, Marguerite de Navarre, Diane 

1 Vide (Horace Walpole) 'A Description of the Villa of 
Mr H W. . . . at Strawberry Hill' ; p, 449 of 1798 Edition. 

•i'The article from which this extract is made was con- 
tributed to Plot and Villofs 'Cabinet de I'amateur ct 
I'antiquaire,' by Harrison Ainsworth, the English writer, who 
had visited Strawberry Hill, shortly before. 


de Poitiers, Lautrec, Admiral de Bonnivet, Claude de 
France, the Baron de Fiaeac, Madeleine de France, the 
first wife of James V of Scotland, with about thirty other 
portraits. YTranslated.^ r •, . 

Mariette's note, inserted here, could not fail to 
excite curiosity. An album of portraits owned by 
Brantome, supplemented by inscriptions in his 
handwriting, was sure to make a lasting impression 
on the minds of collectors. But no further infor- 
mation was forthcoming. We did not know what 
had become of the volume ; ' Le Cabinet de 
I'amateur' merely stated' that a certain Mr. Boone 
had purchased it, and he was quite unknown. Since 
that time everyone interested in the history of 
French portraiture has found himself in the same 
state of ignorance. When the due d'Aumale com- 
missioned M. Bouchot to catalogue the portraits 
which his late Royal Highness had bought from 
the Castle Howard collections, M. Bouchot thought 
for a moment that he recognised some of Walpole's 
drawings among them. I refer to those inscribed 
according to the peculiar mode of spelling in which 
' m ' is substituted for ' n.' This might be taken 
as a sign of a Southern French or Gascon com- 
mentator. Might not Mariette have taken this 
8 Vide ' Cabinet de I'amateur,' t. i ; p. 544- 

French Portrait-T^rawings at Knows ley 

writing for Brantome's ? However, this suggestion, 
advanced as a mere guess, was abandoned by its 
author and consigned to his unpublished catalogue 
in the Musee de Chantilly. Nothing more was 
heard of the collection until M. Bouchot made a 
second authoritative reference to it in his 'Quelques 
dames du XVP Siecle et leurs peintres' (page ii), 
published in 1888. 

I had read that an album of drawings annotated by 
Brantome had come under the notice of Mariette towards 
the middle of the last (eighteenth) century. Brantome 
writing his impressions on portraits ! I had pictured to 
myself what piquant revelations, what unpublished facts, 
perhaps, this exceedingly rare document might yield to us, 
if it should ever appear again. Brantome had a thirst for 
writing ; he would not have failed to describe each per- 
sonage, to comment upon him and add some anecdote 
about him. Since the album had disappeared in England, 
I asked myself whether the Castle Howard drawings, with 
their hasty elongated handwriting, had not misled Mariette, 
and whether he had not intended to refer to them in the 
note which has been quoted on the subject. Fortunately 
the album has since been found, with Mariette's comments 
on the lirst page. Unfortunately, though the supposed 
commentator is usually so prolix, the persons are here only 
drily enumerated ; so I think that Mariette was mistaken. 
Besides, though I have not myself seen the album now 
preserved at Liverpool, I cannot help remarking that the 
majority of the persons portrayed in it are people unknown 
to Brantome, and even include gentlemen oi the fifteenth 
century, such as Montaigu, hanged at Montfaucon, and 
Marshal Pierre de Rohan, while Francis I, Claude de 
France, I-ouise de Savoie, Bonnivet (who was killed at 
Pavia) and Madame de Canaples belong to a generation 
even ancestral to Brantome's. Even Diane de Poitiers 
scarcely comes within the number of his immediate con- 
temporaries. A further proof against the attribution is that 
women of the reign of Louis XIII are included, whereas 
Brantome had then been long dead. 

This footnote is added : — 

This notice was communicated to me by M. Thibaudeau, 
who kindly travelled to Liverpool for me, and made a list 
of the portraits preserved in the album. [Translated.] 

The new information extended no further, and 
added to that of forty years previously, remained 
until quite recently all that was known in France 
concerning Walpole's album. In the preface to 
a history of the portrait in France in the six, 
teenth century which will appear soon, I had the 
following note on 'Collections which have dis- 
appeared ' ready for the press : — 

Another lost album is Walpole's, sold at Strawberry Hill 
in 1842, and formerly in Mariette's possession. M. Bouchot 
states in the year 1888 that it had been just rediscovered in 
Liverpool. The expert, Thibaudeau, who had seen it, 
supplied M. Bouchot with the list of the portraits, but it 
was never published. Combining all that is known about 
the matter from several aulhorities. it is impossible to guess 
whether the book was original or no. It certainly contained 
two portraits of ladies of the time of Louis XIII, but these 
might have been interpolated. [Translakd.] 

It was a misunderstanding, the impression left 
on Bouchot's mind that Thibaudeau had seen the 
album at a sale, which helped to mislead inquiry. 
However, a kind informant at last revealed to me 
where the precious volume was kept, and the courtesy 
of Lord Derby in permitting me to study it has 
cleared up the mystery which enveloped it, and 
enriched the history of French art with a new 
source of information. 

The album at Knowslcy is a remarkable specimen 
of a type of book much in vogue at the period of 
the French Renaissance. Albums of the same 
class are to be found in the town libraries of Aix-en- 
Provenceand Lille ; in the library of theMus^edes 
Arts et Metiers and in the Cabinet des Estampes, 
in Paris ; in the collection of Monsieur Anatole 
France, and elsewhere. They consist in a number 
of contemporary likenesses selected, not for the 
fame of the persons represented, but for their 
prominence in the society of their time. They are 
' Court Albums,' no doubt intended for people 
about the Court, who were relatives or friends of 
the persons represented. In the form of light and 
handy volumes, they seemed to have served for 
the purposes of amusement as much as for sou- 
venirs. In the Montmor Album, preserved at Aix-en- 
Provence, the portraits are furnished with mottoes, 
erroneously believed to be by Francis the First, 
and over each motto and name a slip of paper was 
attached, no doubt to be moved a^ide after those 
hints had served to identify the person represented. 

The portraits comprised in these series are 
repeated from album to album ; one original, like 
a photographic negative, being used to reproduce 
them all. Such albums were produced all through 
the century, from Francis I to Henry IV. If we 
review album after album in order of time, we find 
the early likenesses gradually making way for 
others, until none of the earliest period remain 
except Francis I and his particular clique. 

Besides the picture of contemporary society, 
which it was their object to present in procession, 
as they do before our eyes now, we observe that 
they had another use. They served as copies for 
enamellers. It is from this type of album, and not 
from original drawings, that the still-extant enamel 
portraits of those times were copied, mostly by 
Leonard Limousin. 

There is one feature which distinguishes the 
Knowsley Album from all others ; the portraits 
are not accompanied by any uniform writing which 
could be accounted original. Such writing is 
found in all the rest, and is generally calligraphic 
in style. The inscriptions were an integral part of 
the work and were certainly written by the person 
commissioned to produce it. But in the Knowsley 
Album the inscriptions are by different hands, not 
even contemporary with the drawings. For ex- 
ample ; ' Monsieur le Comte de Tavannes,' on 
number 15, must have been written before 1570, 
when he was created Marshal, otherwise the writer 
would not have failed to name him by his title. 
On the other hand, the note, ' pere de la Reine 
Louise ' (No. 18), fixes 1574 as its earliest date, for it 
refers to the Queen-Consort of Henry III. The 
differences in the handwritings and the dates are 
enough to prove that the album was delivered 
without the inscriptions to the patron who com- 
missioned it, and those now appearing in it were 


French Portrait-T>rawitigs at Knowsley 

written in later, at different times and in no fixed 
order. This will raise the question whether snch 
facts do not cast doubts on the unity of the volume. 
1 reply that notwithstanding these differences, the 
paper of drawings 4, 5, it, 16, 25 and 26 contains 
the same water-mark although the drawings bear 
four different handwritings. Therefore these 
different handwritings cannot be a sign of draw- 
ings from different sources, subsequently placed in 
juxtaposition. Such is particularly the case with 
the Knowsley Album, and attracts special attention 
to it. As regards the question of its date, this 
peculiarity prevents us from solving it by the 
criterion of its inscriptions. In this respect the 
portraits themselves alone offer any help. None 
are to be found in the album more recent than 
15^,0, which is the date of No. 28. Moveover the 
fidelity, with which the style of the supposed 
Jean Clouet is reproduced in these copies, attests 
a period contemporary with the works thus com- 
monly identified. The album must therefore be 
regarded as a commission executed for a patron 
of the time of F'rancis I. 

Another exceptional feature of the Knowsley 
Album is the merit of the drawings of which it is 
composed. In all the other albums they are 
execrable. Their merit is so low that one cannot 
dream of seeking any resemblance in them to 
sitters so entirely changed and debased by the 
clumsiness of the work. In the Knowsley Album, 
on the contrary, the work is good. In spite of 
feebleness and timidity, the features of the original 
portraits which we can recognise, are exactly 
copied, and their physiognomy truthfully rendered. 
In cases where no originals exist, or are only known 
as yet from other copies, these Knowsley draw- 
ings are not unworthy substitutes. For example 
Marguerite Dnclicsse il'Aleiifon, sister of Francis 
the First, and Diane cie Poitiers, at the time of her 
marriage, lost originals which are represented 
in other albums by detestable travesties, are 
revived for us at Knowsley in quite charming 

Since the titles identifying the portraits were 
the after-thoughts of a later generation, it is 
not surprising if they are liable to inaccuracy. 
In fact, they contain more numerous and serious 
errors than occur in the notes— invariably later 
still— upon the original drawings of the period. 
Fifteen out of the thirty portraits of the album 
bear wrong names. These titles clearly emanate 
from the collectors who owned the album. Useless 
as they are for iconographical research, they never- 
theless have their uses, considered as evidence of the 
passage of the album through several collections. 
The most ancient of the handwritings is with- 
out doubt the ' current bastard ' on Nos. i, 8, 9, 
14, 18, 23, 24 and 27. The second most ancient 
is a 'slanting cursive' on Nos. 4, 6, 19, 20, 21, 
23, 26 and 27. The third is a second * bastard ' 


prior to 1570 (see above), on Nos. 15, 16 and 17. 
The fourth is an 'upright cursive ' of the time of 
Henry III at the earliest, on Nos. 5, 7, 10, 18, 29. 
Finally in the fifth style, without doubt much 
later, appears the hand of a collector, who, from 
a desire for uniformity, copied the ancient writing 
and then did his best to obliterate it either by 
cancelling it or by cutting off that part of the 
page ; a task, however, which he left unfinished. 
After all this, came Marietteand Walpole, Mariette 
with some scattered notes, and Walpole with 
remarks written on the backs of the pages, com- 
menting on the ancient writings. Therefore, at 
least five owners had owned the album before 
Mariette, the first four of them during the course 
of the sixteenth century, and among these four 
Mariette thought that he had discovered Brantome. 
The owners' intervention is recognizable again 
in the interpolated drawings. One of them reaches 
back almost to the period of the earliest examples 
and, like them, betrays the character of a copy. 
The rest are much later, of the second half of the 
century. These latter are stuck on to the fly- 
leaves of the ancient drawings, while the older 
one is inserted between a drawing and its guard. 
This position, combined with the differences of 
the paper, proves the interpolation. 


1. King Francis I. 

The original drawing, by the artist presumed to be 
Jean Clouet^ (Musee de Conde, Chantilly). The picture 
by the same hand, after the original (the Louvre). Other 
copies in secondhand albums" : Montmore (Bibliotheque 
de la Ville, Aix-en-Province), drawing, i ; Cabinet 
(Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris), i ; Uxelles (Bibliotheque 
Nationale), i ; Destailleur (Chantilly), i (torn out, but 
recognizable by the set-ofl) ; Doubrolsky (Imperial 
Library, St. Petersburg), I ; Bethune (Chantilly), i ; 
Sorbonne (Bibliotheque Nationale), i ; Second Louvre, 
8; Arts et Metiers (that museum, Paris), tom. i, 
drawing 2. 

2. Louise de Savoie, mother of Francis I. 

The original drawing is lost. The best picture after the 
original is a miniature ' The Book of Hours of Catherine 
de Medicis' (Louvre). Other copies in secondhand 
albums: Cabinet, drawing 27; Uxelles, 2 ; Destailleurs, 
2 ; Doubrofsky, 2 ; Bethune, 4 ; First St. Petersburg (the 
Hermitage), 2 ; Sorbonne, 5 ; First Louvre, i ; Second 
Louvre, 16 ; Rapilly,' i ; Valori (women) (Bibliotheque 
de la Ville, Lille), i. 
Walpole's inscription calls her incorrectly 

' diichesse d'Angouleme' ; her correct title was 

' cointesse.' 

* The drawings follow in their original page-order, interpo- 
lated pages being appended under bracketed numbers. 

^ For convenience of printing, this artist is represented 
throughout these Notes as ' Jean Clouet,' that name, or ' Janet,' 
having become established by use to identify a body of work 
evidently by one hand, and that, not improbably, the hand of 
Francis the First's court painter. 

1 venture to express thus their artistic worthlessness ; 
excepting the Knowsley series. 

'An album which had been taken to pieces ; pages of it were 
recently in the possession of M. Rapilly, the Paris bookseller. 

French Portrait'T)rawings at Knows ley 

3. Marguerite, sister of Francis I, later Queen of 

Navarre, at tltai time djicliesse il'AIetifon, 

The original drawing is lost. Other copies in second- 
hand albums: Montmor, drawing 2 ; Cabinet, 2 ; Uxelles, 
5 ; Destailleur, 6 ; Doubrofsky, 6 ; Bcthune, 5 ; First St. 
Petersburg, 6 ; Sorbonne, 3 ; First Louvre, 6 ; Second 
Louvre, 9. 

The old title calls her wrongly Marguerite de 
France ; she could not be so entitled, not being 
the daughter of a king, but only ' Marguerite 
d'Orleans,' Orleans being the appanage of the 
branch of the blood-royal from which she came. 
She has also been called ' Marguerite d'Angouleme,' 
but irregularly, from her father's county ; and 
also ' Marguerite de Valois ' from the duchy held 
by Francis I before he succeeded to the throne. 

4. TJie DanpJiin Francis, son of Francis I, ivlio 
died in i $^6. Austria ivas suspected of liaving 
poisoned Iiiin. 

The original drawing, tiy ' Jean Clouct ' (Chantilly). 
The picture by the same hand, aiterthe original (Museum, 
Antwerp). One other copy only in secondhand albums ; 
Montmor, drawing 3. 

5. Henri IF, as a child, while he still bore the title 
of due d'Orleans. He took the title of Dauphin 
zi'/ien his brother Francis (the preceding portrait, 

No. 4) died. 

The original drawing by ' Jean Clouet' (Chantilh). One 
other copy only in secondhand albums : Montmor, 
drawing 4. 

The old title is wrong, and applies to the following 
portrait, No. 6. 

6. Tlie due d'Orleans, Charles, third son of 
Francis I ; as a child, ivhilc he was only called 'due 
d'Angoulesnie.' He assumed the name of Orleans 
when Henri II resigned it in order to succeed to 
the title of Dauphin, vacated by the death of their 
eldest brother. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). 
One other copy only, in secondhand albums : Montmor, 
drawing 7, 

The old title is wrong.and applies to the preceding 
portrait, No. 5. 

7. Charlotte, daughter of Francis I ; ivho died in 
1524, aged seven years. 

The original drawing is lost. The picture by ' Jean 
Clouet,' after the original, belongs to Mme. Thomson. 
It was exhibited under the wrong title, Jeanne d'Albret, 
in the Exposition des Primitifs Fran(;ais, 1904. One 
other copy only, in secondhand albums ; Montmor, 
drawing 5. 

The old title is wrong, and applies to the following 

8. Madeleine, daughter of Francis I, who married 
James V, King of Scotland. 

The original drawing, by an unknown hand (Chantilly). 
Other copies in secondhand albums : Montmor, drawing 
6 ; Third St. Petersburg (the Hermitage), 3. 

The old title is wrong. 

9. The Duchess of Ferrara, Renee, daughter of 
Louis KII, wife of Alfonso II, Duke of Ferrara, ivho 
became a Protestant, and was obliged to return to 
France, ivhere she died, at the Chateau de Montargis, 

'■» 1575- 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). 
The best painting after the original, in ' The Book of 
Hours,' of Catherine de Midicis. Other copies in second- 
hand albums : Destailleurs, 7 ; Doubrofsky, 7 ; First St. 
Petersburg, 9 ; First Louvre, 12 ; Valori (women), 15. 

10. Monsieur de Boisy Artus de Gouffier, Grand- 
uiattre of tlic King's House, who had been tutor to 
Francis/; died in isiq. He fought at Marignan, 
and urns brother of Admiral Bonnivct. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). A 
miniature by the same hand, after the original, in 'La 
Guerre Gallique ' (Bibliotheque Nationale). Other copies 
in secondhand albums : Montmor, drawing 41 ; U.felles, 
6; Destailleurs, 15; Doubrofsky, 14; Bethune, 16; 
Second St. Petersburg, 21 ; Third St. Petersburg, 9 ; 
Second Louvre, I. 
The old title is wrong, and applies to No. 14. 

11. Admiral Bonnivct, ivlio was part cause of the 
disgrace of the Constable de Bourbon ; killed at 
Pavia, 1526. He fought at Marignan, and icas 
brother of the Grand-malt re Boisy. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). A 
miniature, by the same hand, after the original, in ' La 
Guerre Gallique.' The Knowsley drawing is the only 
example in secondhand albums. 

The old title is wrong. 

12. Monsieur de Lesparre Andre de Foix, biotlier 
of Marslial Lautrec and of Mine, de Chateaubriand, 
the favourite of Francis I. 

The original drawing is lost. Other copies in second- 
hand albums : Montmor, 32 ; Cabinet, 33 ; Destailleur, 
47 ; Second St. Petersburg, 8 ; Third St. Petersburg, 5. 

The old title is wrong. 

13. Marshal de Lapalice. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). A 
miniature, by the same hand after the originnl, in 'La 
Guerre Gallique.' Other copies in secondhand albums : 
Montmor, 41 ; D.\'elles, 44 ; Bt-thune, 13 ; Second St. 
Petersburg, 13 ; Third St. Petersburg, 6 ; Sorbonne, 39 ; 
Clairambault,* 2 ; Kapilly, 4. 

14. Marshal Lautrec, brother of Mme. de Chateau- 
briand, K'ho was defeated at La Bicoque and lost the 


The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). A 
miniature by the same hand, after the original, in 'La 
Guerre Gallique." Other copies in secondhand albums : 
Montmor, 46 ; Cabinet, 23 ; Destailleur, 17 ; Doubrofsky, 
15 ; Bethune, 14 ; Second St. Petersburg, 31 ; Valori 
(men), 43. 

The old title is wrong. 

15. Monsieur de Tournon, Juste, first of the natne, 
brother of Cardinal de Tournon. He fought at 
Marignan, and was killed at Pavia. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). A 
miniature, by the same hand, after the original, in 'La 
Guerre Gallique,' One copy only in secondhand albums: 
Montmor, drawing 40. 

The old title is wrong. 

* An album which has been taken fo pieces ; parts are dis- 
persed among the Clairambault Collection (Cabinet des Manu- 
scrits, Paris). 



French Portmit-T>ra')yings at Knomley 

i6. The Constable dc Montmorency, as a yoiuiil 


The original drawing is lost. It belonged to the 
Castle Howard collections, and is leprodiiced in I.ord 
Konald Gowcr's work," but is missing at Chanlilly, 
where, as I have stated, those diawings now are. The 
reason for its absence has not been explained. A 
miniature, by ' Jean Clouet,' after the original, in ' I.a 
fiuerre Gainqiie.' The Knowsley drawing is the only 

Tlie old title is wrong. 

17. Galiot dc GcnoniUiac, Gvand-nuulrc of ilie 


The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chanlilly). 
The Knowsley drawing is the only copy. 
The old title is wrong. 

18. Monsieur de Vaudcmont, Louis de Lorraine, 

brotlier oj tlie first due de Guise, 3c7w jcv;s killed at 

the siege of Xaples, ij^S. 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chantilly). 

Other copies in secondhand albums : Montmor, drawing 

44; Cabinet, 21; Destailleur, 11; Doubrofsky, 10; 

Second St. Petersburg, 33 ; Third St. Petersburg, 7 ; 

Sorbonne, 4S ; Second Louvre, 6 ; V.alori (men), 34. 
The old comment on the oldest title is wrong. 
Queen Louise's father, also called Vaudemont, 
was Nicholas de Lorraine, nephew to Louis. 

19. Cliandio, aide de camp to the Clievaiier 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Cliantilly). 
Other copies in secondhand albums : Montmor, drawing 
10 ; Cabinet, 15 ; Destailleur, 29 ; Doubrofsky, 28 ; 
Second St. Petersburg, 19. 

20. Monsieur de Barbezienx, brollwr of the Comte 
de Larochefoncald, Franfois II. 

The original drawing is lost. Other copies in second- 
hand albums : Montmor, drawing 2S ; Cabinet, 14 ; 
Destailleur, 40 ; Bethune, 22 ; Second St. Petersburg, 28 ; 
Sorbonne, 42 ; Clairambault, i ; Second Louvre, 7. 
The old title is wrong. 

21. Flenranges, afterwards Marshal dc Lauiarcl;. 

The original drawing is lost. A miniature by ' Jean 
Clouet,' after the original, in ' La Guerre Gallique.' 
Other copies in secondhand albums : Montmor, drawing 
39 ; Cabinet, 10 ; Dxelles, 17 ; Destailleur, 43 ; Bethune, 12. 

22. The Bailli de Paris, Monsieur d'Alcgre. 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chantilly). 
Another copy : Montmor, drawing 47. 
The old title is wrong. 

23. Man, unknown. 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chanlilly). 
The Knowsley drawing is the only copy. The old 
title is doubtful. 

24. Monsieur de Vaudemont ; the same Subject 
as No. 18. 

The original drawing (Chantilly). 
The Knowsley drawing is the only copy. The old 
title is wrong. 

9 ' Three Hundred French Portraits by Clouet— CasUe 
Howard,' by Lord Ronald C.S. L. Gower, 1875. 


25. Mail, uuhnowu. 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chantilly). 
The Knowsley drawing is the only copy. The old 
title is wrong. 

26. Man, uul;no7i<n. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). 

The Knowsley drawing is the only copy. The old 
title is wrong. 

27. Mnie. de Cauaples, hug kno7vn under the 
name of 'La belle Assiguy.' S/ie ivas one of the 
i/dimiilc court of the ki>ig called ' la petite ba?ide.' 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chantilly). 
Other copies in secondhand albums ; Montmor, drawing 
44 ; Cabinet, 54 ; Destailleur, 14 ; Doubrofsky, 13 ; 
Bethune, 31 ; First St. Petersburg, 48. 

28. Diane de Poitiers, as a young ividoie. 

The original drawing, by ' Jean Clouet ' (Chantilly). 
Other copies in secondhand albums : Cabinet, drawing 
40; Uxelles, 7; Destailleur, 13; Bethune, 27; First 
Louvre, 17 ; Second Louvre, 15. 

29. Diane de Poitiers, as a married 'woman. 
The original drawing is lost. Other copies in second- 
hand albums : Montmor, drawing 14. 

30. The Bailive de Caen, of the house of Motier- 

Lafayette, a celebrated beauty ivho ivas one of t/ie 

'petite bande' of the king. 

The original drawing, by 'Jean Clouet' (Chantilly), 
Other copies in secondhand albums : Cabinet, drawing 
35; Destailleur, 28; Doubrofsky, 27; Bethune, 35; 
Sorbonne, 32 ; First Louvre, 25 ; Second Louvie, 24. 


(i) Woman, unknown. The title, 'Claude de 

France,' is wrong. 

No doubt the remnant of some secondhand album. 

(2) Man, unknown, circ. 1595 ; a valuable 
original drawing by Pierre Dumoutier, the uncle. 

(3) Gabrielle d'Estrees, a copy. 

The original di awing; in the Cabinet des Estampes, 

(4) Woman, unknown, circ. 1574, a valuable 
original drawing. 

(5) Woman, unknown, circ. 1590; a copy. 

(6) Woman, unknown, circ. 1600 ; an original 
drawing by Pierre Dumoutier, the uncle. 

(7) Woman, unknown, c/rc. 1597 ; an admirable 
original drawing by the Master of the Monogram, 

(8) Woman, unknown, c/>c. 1582. 

(9) Woman, unknown, circ. 1570. 

(10) Woman (bourgeoise), unknown, circ. 1600; 
original drawing by the Master, I.D.C. 

(11) Woman, unknown, circ. 1590. 

(12) Catherine de Medicis ; copy. 

The original belonged to the late Mr. Salting. 

(13) The Duchesse de Montpensier, Jacqueline 

de Longwy ; a copy. 

The original drawing ; Chantilly, 

(14) (15) (16) Three Portraits of the seventeenth 
century ; one is by Lagneau, and wears the 
costume of 15 17. 

French T^ortrait-TDrav^higs at Knov^sley 



No. 7. 

No. 10. 

No. 18. 

No. 29. 

}>UnssicH^ Jut i^oir^cc' 

mint dii ^m/ceri' dll-i:fjiu9c elt /aloibnCi'S 


French Tortrait-T>ra^Virigs at Knomley 


Mariette assures us that this handwriting is 
recognizable in tlic inscriptions, and since he no 
doubt perceived that the inscriptions were by 
several hands, he only states that the handwriting 
exists 'on several drawings.' Even a slight com- 
parison of tiie five old styles of handwriting with 
Brantome's is sufticient to exclude all of them 
except the fourth. None other gives any substance 
to Mariette's assurance. It is therefore the fourth 
style which we must examine. No extrinsic con- 
sider.ition concerning the album should affect the 
enquiry. Monsieur Bouchot's objection that 
Brantome would not have confined himself to 
merely naming the persons represented, but would 
have added anecdotes, is an arbitrary one ; his 
other objection, that the persons represented are 
later than the time at which Brantome lived, is 
answered (as I had foreseen) by the interpolation 
of the portraits. 

Now, for the inscriptions themselves : five of 
them are written in the fourth style : 

No. 5. ' Monsieur d' Orleans qui iiioiirnt a (lis linict 
ans.' — 'Wrong title. 

No. 7. ' La reyne Dcscose qui uionnil en passan 
la nter.' — Wrong title. 

No. 10. ' Monsieur de Lolraic.' — Wrong title. 

No. 18. ' Perc dc la reyne Louise.' — Wrong 
comment on the title. ' Monsieur de Vaudemont ' 
here signifies the great-uncle, not the f.ither, of 
Queen Louise. 

No. 29. 'Diane de Poitiers, dncJiaisc de Valen- 

Four of the five inscriptions, therefore, are 
wrong. Ought that alone to cast doubts on 
Brantome's authorship ? Certainly not. He 
might have been mistaken concerning the identity 
of a portrait as easily as any other author. All 
the same, it must be observed that a mistake in one 
note by Brantome would have been all the 
greater, because the portrait from which the copy 
was taken was not imknown to him. ' Monsieur 
de Vaudemont', he writes in his life of that prince, 
' frere de mondit Sieur de Guise, dont j'ai vu le 
portrait en Lorraine'. Now scarcely a single 
portrait of the prince is known, except the one of 
which the drawing and some others are copies. 
In this case then, by mistaking the person repre- 
sented, Brantome would have erred not only in 
ignorance, but from forgetful ness. Still, even that 
is not impossible. Another mistake — of fact, this 
time : Madame Madeleine (No. 7) died in Edin- 
burgh and not at sea. To this I reply, as before ; 
a writer so inexact, so capricious and self-con- 
tradictory as Brantome, might well have added 

this caprice to his many others. It is the li.uid- 
writing itself, then, that wc must examine. 

Now the question first of all is this : Can we 
hope to make Mariette's comparison over again 
with the same manuscripts of Brantome which 
were known to him ? If other manuscripts 
should still leave us in doubt, little would be 
proved against Mariette's conclusion, since we 
might still wonder whether the manuscripts used 
by him might not have offered resembl.uiccs which 
were wanting in ours. If, on the other hand, 
we are in a position to test his conclusion by the 
identical documents on which it was based, our 
conclusion is inevitable. Well, we have those 
manuscripts. They have been kept in the Cabinet 
des Manuscrits in Paris since 1904." They came 
from the Baroness James de Rothschild, and are 
numbered 20,408 to 20,480 ' New Acquisitions.' 
With the exception of one quite unimportant 
volume of poetry in private ownership, they are 
the only known manuscripts of Brantome's, of 
which a part was written by his own hand. Neither 
the volume which came from Bignon (in the 
Cabinet since 1745), nor those of the/onds Belhnne 
(acquired in 1663) are autographic. This would 
perhaps be assurance enough that it was from this 
source that Mariette judged of Brantome's hand- 
writing. But there is more positive proof. We 
know that the Rothschild manuscripts came to 
Paris in the time of Mariette, and were in Le 
Duchat's hands for the edition of Brantome which 
he published in 1740. They answer exactly to 
Mariette's description ' manuscrit corrige de la 
main de Brantome.' 

The body of the manuscript is in fact written by 
the hand of a secretary, only a few pages here and 
there are in the author's own hand. There is then 
no room for uncertainty ; we have only to test 
Mariette'sassurance by these manuscripts. Mariette 
is precise : ' Je m'en suis affermi par la confronta- 
tion que j'en ai faite avecun manuscrit authentique 
tout corrige de la main de ce ctlebre ecrivain.' 
Everyone can now judge for himself. A com- 
parison of this manuscript with the fourth style 
of writing in the Knowsley Album totally fails 
to give that assurance ; it could not convince any- 
one of the identity of the two handwritings. 
Certainly there are some points of resemblance, 
but none such as to carry conviction. Now, here 
certainty is everything, for Mariette's authority 
rests entirely on a comparison which we can 
make after him. Everything is contained for us 
in this comparison. Mariette reg.u-ded it as a 
guarantee; no one else will see in it anything of 
the sort. Consequently all positive reason for 
believing that Brantome ever owned the Album 
vanishes under examination. 

w Vide Omont ' Notice sur les Manuscrits de Brantome ' Biblio- 
theque de I'Ecole des Chartes, annee 1904. 



HE porcelains painted in 
under-glaze blue during the 
later years of Wan Li's reign, 
and the transitional period 
between the Ming and the 
Ch'ing Dynasties, are usually 
summed up contemptuously 
under the name of 'Export- 
goods.' They deserve this reproach less than 
many of the pieces decorated in enamel pigment, 
which are really contemporary with them, but 
might well be taken for 'modern Canton' if their 
antiquity were not certified by documentary evi- 
dence.^ In spite of the enormous exportation 
which had already begun before the close of the 
Wan Li period (i573-i6i9),the porcelain decorated 
in underglaze blue does not entirely lose its artistic 
qualities, for instance, the grace and originality of 
the drawing remain. We have already seen, and 
we shall find further corroboration, how clearly 
Persian taste is reflected by porcelain of the late 
Ming period. Beyond the neighbouring countries, 
the Portuguese'' and Dutch, the great colonists, and 
traders with Eastern Asia, were the chief Euro- 
pean customers, and even during times of internal 
convulsion in China, flooded the Chinese porcelain 
manufactories with orders. At this period Chinese 
plates and bowls seem to have fascinated Dutch 
amateurs as Japanese colour-prints fascinated 
Parisian painters and collectors thirty years ago. 
Mr. Edward Dillon in his book ' Porcelain'' has 
mentioned certain Netherlands painters of still- 
life, who represent Chinese blue porcelain of the 
early seventeenth century. His list might easily 
be enlarged by the addition of many other names. 
Pieter Claesz, Heda, Treck, Nason, Luttichuis, 
Horst.DeHeem, and above all SnydersandW. Ivalf ' 
rival one another in the correct representation of 
' Nanking ' porcelain. Snyders indeed introduces 
no less than seven Chinese plates into one of his 

1 For the former article, see Burlington Magazine, Vol. 
XVIII, p, 40 (October igio). 

' Historical collections such as Augustus the Strong's and 
Queen Sophia Charlotte's of Prussia (the latler was completed 
by Frederick the Great) contain pieces of enamelled Wan Li 
porcelain so coarse and clumsy that they seem like satires by 
Chinese ceramicists on their western customers' blind mania 
for collecting. 

^ The Portuguese Government still possesses important and 
extensive collections, and since no one has yet examined them 
scienlilically, they may yet greatly advance our knowledge of 
the subject. 

^' Porcelain,' by Edward Dillon. London : Methuen. 1904. 

' In the beautiful Still-Life by Willem ICalf (Kaiser P'riedrich 
Museum, Berlin, No. 948 F) appears a covered bowl in blue 
underglaze, which is further decorated with groups of the 
eight Taouist immortals in painted and gilt biscuit-relief. Three 
similar bowls arc in the Pierpont ^Iorgan collection, New 
York (Case C, No. 5-7, Catalogue Plate XVI). Laftan dates 
them ' early sixteenth century,' and adds, ' probably Chia Ching'; 
their grey-blue colour, and some details in the drawing — eg,., 
the form of the clouds, faces, etc.— probably place the date later 
— about the middle of Wan Li's reign. 

pictures.'"' With few exceptions the pieces thus 
represented are of the type already described' — 
the deep bowls slightly waved in profile, the rims 
divided into panels, decorated in the style of 
Wan Li's middle period, with birds, symbols, 
flowers, fruit and festoons, or the usual substitutes 
for such forms, spirals or points. As to the central 
decoration, since the plates appear in these paint- 
ings filled with fruit, etc., it is not visible. 

Approximate to this type, but differentiated 
from it by the ornament, which is richer and 
more personally characteristic in certain details, 
we find dishes and plates which bear the Ming 
character throughout and might have been 
made in the first decade of the seventeenth 
century. Their surface is still slightly waved and 
covered with a greenish white glaze. The system of 
decoration is based on severely drawn panels and 
ribbons supplemented by a wealth of plants, land- 
scapes and figures which show that the artist took a 
naive delight in narrative ornament. Mrs. Halsey 
has in her collection in London a large plate, the 
decoration of which forms a sort of compendium of 
motives often copied or varied later. Ontheground- 
work of this plate, a mandarin, attended by boys 
carrying fans and lanterns, regards a picturesque 
landscape from a verandah of his house. Though 
the mountains in the distance look improbably near, 
they show a certain appreciation of the stratification 
of mountain ranges, and with the lines of their 
rocky slopes interrupted by clouds, suggest ill- 
assimilated memories of some famous picture. In 
other pieces such memories have grown more 
distinct. In the alternately wide and narrow 
panels of the rim appears a rice-peasant distin- 
guishable by his plate-like bast hat ; and there is 
an abundance of floral motives. These last are 
repeated with slight variations on a kindred 
example, a bowl (H. 6| in. D. 14 in.) in the South 
Kensington Museum. (252-1889). [Plate I, d]. 
This beautiful piece, painted in gray, indigo- 
tinted blue, is characterised as a product of 
the Wan Li, or at least of the T'ien Ch'i period, 
not by the tone of colour only, for the panels 
with their groups of figures inclining towards 
one another, placed in this instance in a 
rather tame riverside landscape, are to be found 
also in early undated Wan Li pieces.* The same 
figured panels appear in a pair of large bowls 
belonging to Mr. W. J. Tower, of Lindfield, Sussex,' 
which the arrangement of their decoration alone 

^A Lady with dead game, frail and vegetables. Konigliche 
Gem.alde Sammlung, Dresden. 

^Burlington Magazine, Vol. xviii, p. 40 (October, 1910). 

* Cf. Mr. Pierpont Morgan's famous saucer-dish with the 
mount of the years 1385 to 1595, illustrated in Bushell's ' Chinese 
Art,' Vol. ii, fig. 22. 

^ Exhibited at the Burlington Fine Arts Club Exhibition, 1910, 
Case E, 13 and 19. 


Towards a Group! fig of Qhincse Porcelain lo be works of tlic Ming period.'" 
Wliether several hands were concerned in the 
decoration of these pieces, painted so similarly in 
all their details, is not easy to decide ; but we 
have an indication towards that conclusion, for 
the occasionally confused disposition of the panels 
and the rather clumsy manner of their fillings 
seems, for a single decorator, incompatible with 
the high state of perfection reached in some of the 
compositions ; for instance, the figure in the bot- 
tom of the South Kensington bowl [Plate I, d] 
a woman at her distaff, the contour of which shows 
a certain grandeur, totally different from the other 
pedantically painted panel-figures. The most in- 
teresting historical point in these three pieces lies in 
their floral decoration. The excessive ornament 
has become the main object of the work instead of 
form, substance and glaze — the true end of cera- 
mics — and will appear, especially from the historic 
point of view, a foreign element. In that result 
we must recognize a mixed style, Perso-Chincse in 
character, with perhaps some European influence. 
Immediately after the death of the emperor Wan Li 
(1619), came the disastrous raids of the Manchus in 
their migration southwards, and, following them, 
completefailureof the crops. These internal troubles 
compelled the porcelain factories, which had before 
employed so many hands, either to close their 
works or to depend on the orders of foreigners — 
Persians, Indians, Portuguese and Dutchmen. 
Deference to the taste of Western consumers is 
evident in the flora now used by preference for 
ornament and in the change from a perfectly free 
realistic manner of drawing to a very strict de- 
corative style. This would not be so obvious if 
it were not that realistic figure-scenes, purely 
Chinese in invention were not — as in the three 
pieces here described — placed in close juxtaposition 
to one of those un-Chinese strictly drawn panels 
of flowers, pleasing enough to ' barbarians,' but 
surely not to the critical eyes of the superin- 
tendents of the Imperial Factory. 

It is not always easy to ascertain accurately 
what species of flowers were used by the porcelain 
painters of the early part of the seventeenth century. 
The tulip-like forms on the South Kensington 
bowl might be derived from a ' hand of Buddha,' 
an orchid or some other native plant, if not from 
some caryophyllaceous flower (see the panel of Mr. 
Tower's bowl), or even from lotus leaves drawn 
in a manner strongly reminding us of acanthus 
leaves, as on Mr. Tower's bowl (and Hoe 219). 

It has been necessary to deal more in detail 
withthesepiecesof the beginningof the seventeenth 
century in order to define a large group of porce- 
lains, the dating of which causes great difficulty. 
1"! am inclined to regard as an antetype of this strongly 
characterized and richly decorated bowl a large bowl, photo- 
graphs of which Mr. E. Alfred Jones placed at my disposal. 
Its beautiful mounting, in English silver-gilt of the years 1585 
to 1590, comes from the same studio as Mr. Pierpont Morgan's 
Burleigli House piece. 


It would not otherwise be readily understood why 
they should be assigned now to the Wan Li, nowlo 
the Kang-hsi period, now even (vase with Persian 
engr.ived brass cover and rims (H. i8f in., D. 
5Un.) South Kensington 1601-76) [PLATE I, b] to 
the eighteenth century. 

In grouping so large a quantity of porcelains 
I started from one piece of the Robert Hoe 
collection. New York, which is rich in interest- 
ing underglaze blue pieces. It bears a decora- 
tion of conventionalized flowers not very 
striking at first sight, arranged in horizontal 
bands," but it falls outside the generality of the 
Kang-hsi porcelain by reason of the velvet-like 
shimmer of the blue, and the strangeness of the 
ornamentation. The elegantly curved tendril- 
work, developed here into forms almost acanthus- 
like, recurs at the neck and base of a jug (H. 8^ in. 
Hoe), as do also the 'violet-in-milk' tone of the 
blue [Plate II, c]. The body is ornamented with a 
pretty landscape in the Sung style. Slim fir trees rise 
like tall candles against the horizon beyond the 
mountains (they are again to be found represented 
in the same way by little strokes, on Mrs. Halsey's 
large bowl), and in the distance on the left are 
outlined conical mountains, which have passed 
from paintings by the Sung masters. Ma Yuan, 
Ma Lin and others, into the pattern-books. The 
same detail, isolated conical mountains, I found 
on two mounted ewers'- (H. 9!^ in.) of the Hoe 
collection [Plate II, d and e]. Together with 
these a scheme of decoration was invented, 
probably by one of the porcelain painters, which 
has been copied for decades in the manufactories. 
A group of figures [Plate II, D and EJ, a 
presentation of gifts to a high dignitary," 
are composed within a landscape, the essential 
elements of which are the cone-shaped mountains, 
the moon, a steep rocky wall interrupted by lines 
of cloud (not the same as in Ming specimens) 
with pine twigs, and towards the base, palms or 
trees with rounded and summarily drawn foliage ; 
last but not least important, there are scattered about 
small ' pot-hook ' touches suggesting grass, moss 
or shrubs. They are to be observed on almost 
every specimen of this group of porcelain, and 
are even dispersed naively on the floor of a room 
[Plate II, b] and afford an easy method of 
classification of the group." 

"A pair of similar jugs, unmounted, arc in the Royal Char- 
lottenburg Castle (Room 120, No. 138). 

'- A piece, very sinilar to these, in the Royal Castle, Charlot- 
tcnburg, Room 120, No. 39. 

'^ The same motive on a pair of heavy jars in Hampton Court, 
audience chamber ; a third piece in the Queen's private 
chamber, on a vase in the Royal Castle, Charlottenburg, 
Room 96, No. 3. on the cover of the jar in Room 120, No. 106, 
on bottle-shaped vases, Room 120, No. 108, No. 134. Other 
examples : British Museum, Franks Coll., Case K, 1473, 1676. 

"I found these ' pot-hooks ' in a pattern-book, entitled 'Kie tzi 
yiian hua chuan,' a kind of analysis of the various styles, in the 
library of Prof. Friedrich Hirth at New York. The work has 
been published, since 'the reign of the emperor Kang-H'si,in 
several editions. 


A- I B ^^ CI 








Toivards a Grouping of Qhinese Porcelain 

There is a further pecuHarity common to many 
porcelains of this group : viz., narrow bands or 
lines of ornament dehcately engraved in the paste; 
they run horizontally and frame the composition.'^ 
They are especially to be found on cylindrical and 
beaker-shaped vessels, and on these the flat un- 
glazed base [Plate II, a], characteristic of many 
of the Wan Li porcelains, generally recurs. 
Rounded forms naturally have glazed bases ; these 
show a slightly greenish wav}', sometimes even 
sandy glaze on the hollow space of the foot, with 
flaws at the run, apparently caused by the 
stands in the oven. The paste, especially that 
of the bottles made for Persia, is remarkably 
heavy ; those forms predominate which were 
adapted to the foreign demand. Besides gorgeous 
monster vases,'" the heavy jars much copied at 
Delft,'' jugs and ewers with handles'* preponderate, 
also large bottles, of which several mounted in 
Persia are preserved : even the uncommon shape 
of a broad rectangular vessel with very short 
mouth, reminiscent of the form of European 
liqueur-bottles, occurs.'^ 

The rich, often excessive, decoration, and the 
peculiarly vivid blue, that in unsuccessful pieces 
has run, have already been alluded to. The neck 
and shoulders of the vessels generally have a 
tulip - shaped ornament with conventionalised 
acanthus (? lotus) leaves (Hoe 219) [Plate II, c] 
and occasional sweet flag leaves. Many porce- 
lains bear either at the shoulder or less often 
towards the base (Hoe 219) [Plate II, c] a painted 
frieze of chrysanthemum-like flowers, with leaves 
of the same plant, or with conventionalized 
foliage curved in the same style. The main 
decoration -" generally consists of episodes from 
the lives of warriors, saints and scholars. War- 
scenes are the most common, and prompt the 
suggestion that they represent the defence against 
the Manchu, and the revolutionary troops. The 
rocky wall interrupted by clouds, the cone-shaped 

'^ Examples: Cylindrical vase, coll. Rob. Hoe, New York 
(No. 158 of the collection) ; tall vase, Walters Coll., Baltimore 
(figured in Bushell, ' Orient. Cer. Art,' Sect. 7, Plate LXX) ; 
ovoid base, coll. of Prof. Hirth, New York ; cylindr. vessel, 
Metropol. Mus., New York (No. 645); British Mus., Franks 
Coll.,C.ise K, No. 113 (has four bands of ornament !) ; Salting 
Coll., 2165 ; Hampton Court, Queen's private chamber, beaker- 
shaped vase and tall club-shaped vase ; Dresden, Coll. of 
Augustus the Strong, vases above stands 43 D and G ; Char- 
lottenburg. Royal Castle, Room 95, No. 19, Room 120, No. 59 
and loO, etc., etc. 

"^ Dresden, Johanneum, Stand 47 ; South Kens. Mus., 1738-76; 
Royal Castle, Charlottenburg, Room 120, No. 126. 

"Hampton Court, Queen's drawing-room, mantelpiece of 
audience chamber. 

" The Copenhagen Industriemuseum owns an interesting jug 
with animal-heads on handle and spout, recalling the type 
described in The Burlington Magazine, October, page 40. 

i« Royal Castle, Charlottenburg, Room 120, No. 26. 

""There are some pieces, in proportion very few, preserved, 
with animal motives; e.g., a Kylin under a palm (Castle, 
Charlottenburg, Room 120, No. 106), the eight horses of the 
Emperor Wu (Berlin, Kunstgewerbe Museum, Case 392, No. 84, 
1023 ; Dresden, Johanneum, 43 over B), etc. All these have 
the ' pot-hook ' grass, too. 

mountains, and other characteristics already men- 
tioned, are seldom lacking, but in spite of them, 
the freedom with which the decorators narrate the 
events has something very attractive [Plate II, b, 
D and e]. In these naive compositions are found 
figures full of grace with intimately observed 
movement [Plate I, a]. 

It may appear rash to compress into the limits 
of one reign, that of Wan Li, so large a group of 
porcelains, amounting to hundreds of pieces. 
Difference of origin and the political disturbances 
of the time will account, however, for their great 
diversity of quality. Certain compositions clearly 
designed and carefully executed, such as the vase 
with the tiger and hoo in the Walters collection 
and that of the Berlin Kunstgewerbe Museum 
[Plate I, C], maybe ascribed to the Imperial Fac- 
tory of the Wan Li or T'ien Ch'i period, i.e., the 
second or third decade, rather than to the turbulent 
middle of the seventeenth century or the first few 
years of the K'ang Hsi period. Many pieces may 
have been made during the Ch'ung Chen period 
or the Shun Chih times (1628-1661). That the 
original type dates back to the beginning of the 
sixteenth century may be proved by the ovoid jar 
mounted in Europe as a jug (Salting Collection 
No. 2165, figured in Monkhouse), certainly a 
product of the Imperial Factory. Its decoration 
shows a young warrior holding his steed by the 
reins ; it has the delicately engraved band under 
the glaze on body and cover, the moon, rock- 
wall, ' pot-hooks ' — in short, all the features of 
the group. The chased silver-gilt mount, of poor 
workmanship, with restored handle, can be dated 
early seventeenth century, perhaps of the third 
decade.^' The jar itself may be ascribed to the 
end of Wan Li's reign, or at latest to his suc- 
cessor's, T'ien Ch'i (1621-1629). 

Other pieces of this type must have come to 
Europe before the time of K'ang Hsi, for we find 
obvious traces of it in Delft pottery of the mid- 
seventeenth century.-- Another example is a 
Nevers jug painted in fine blue, with Chinese 
figures-^ in the typical landscape, an interesting 
illustration of the wide dispersal of decorative 

*i Monkhouse calls it ' Elizabethan.' Mr. H. P. Mitchell and 
Mr. E. A. Jones both place it in the first decades of the seven- 
teenth century, but differ as to its origin. Mr. Mitchell found r— 1 
the maker's mark, and considers it the same as the one on a 1 w! 
spoon (London hall-marked for 1O69-70), given by Jackson ^^ 
(p. 129), but dates its making much earlier. 

'"See Berlin Kunstgewerbe Museum, Case 288. Hoe Coll. ,219. 
Royal Castle, Charlottenburg (Electors' Room, No. 129) ; a 
piece marked S. E., no doubt Samuel Van Eenhoven, owner of 
the Alpha Factory at Delft in 1674 ; see Jean Justice, ' Marques 
et Monogrammes de faience de Delft.' 

23 Not ' Japanese figures,' as the label of the museum 

[Eiratinii. — Towards a grouping of Chinese 
Porcelain, part I, Plate III, fig. C, facing 
p. 39 (October, 1910), jor 'seki heki ' type, read 
Early Wan Li.— Ed.] 


8. Mezzane di Sotto (Prov. of Verona) : First altar, 

Madonna enthroind li-itli SI. Catherine and St. 

Paul; donors. 
Canvas. 7 ft. 5 ins. h. by S ft. 2 ins. w. (2,27 
by 1,58). 
This picture, sole relic of the former parish 
church of Mezzane, now ' restored ' out of 
existence, has been badly treated. It is in a very 
dirty condition, and the Madonna's face, the whole 
of the Child, and probably other parts have been 
crudely repainted. In 1720 it was described by a 
dilettante critic- as by Girolamo dai Libri. Since 
then no one seems to have examined it except, 
unfortunately, the restorer. The regular scheme 
of the Madonna enthroned under a tree in the 
open air might pass for that of Dai Libri ; cer- 
tainly nothing else speaks for his authorship. 
The characteristics of Caroto are present in detail. 
It is only a question of giving it to Francesco or 
to Giovanni. The landscape in itself is enough to 
transfer the picture from its old attribution to the 
present one. Behind the Madonna is a large tree- 
trunk, and to right and left of it pale grey moun- 
tains bound the^horizon, with patches of sun here 
and there on the upland in the middle distance; 
on the left are a few poplars. These are not the 
clear rocky hills of Dai Libri, but the mysterious 
silver distances of Caroto, the positive touches of 
sun and cloud, the slender golden poplars of his 
special vision. Francesco Caroto had broken 
away from the schematic throned Madonna of the 
Morone tradition ; he never gives us the severely 
balanced composition of the older generation m 
Verona. Giovanni clings to it still, and the 
S. Paolo altarpiece is a signal example. It is, 
indeed, not strange that both that picture and this 
altar of Mezzane were attributed confidently to 
Girolamo dai Libri in an uncritical age. If the 
colour, the rather difficult inclination of the 
Madonna's head and the face of the Child (much 
repainted) are generally Carotesque, the forms ni 
detail are those of Giovanni. The St. Paul bears 
a superficial resemblance to the St. Paul of the 
S. Paolo altar, but goes back really to Francesco's 
figure of the Archangel Michael,^ perhaps the most 
heroic figure he ever painted [PLATE II, A, b]. 
His attitude is the same precisely; he grasps 
the sword in the same way, and it is lighted, 
like St. Michael's, near the hilt. His feet, 
which are somewhat repainted, are bare and 
of the form so peculiar to Francesco Caroto's 
1 For the previous article see Burlington Magazine, Vol. 
xviii, p. 41 (October, 1910). 

"Lanceni, op. at., 'tavo'.a ormai ridotta in pessimo stato per 
la somma incuria in clie fu tenuta.' Da Persico, op. cit., p. :2, 
and Zanandreis, op. cit., p. 90, merely quote his description 
without having seen the picture. 

"Verona Museum, No. 343 ; originally the central part of the 
S, Eufemia altarpiece (see below, No. 9). 


later manner — namely, with a curious shrunken 
appearance, the tendons strongly marked, the 
great toe small almost to the point of defor- 
mity. Francesco not seldom repeats his figures 
in different compositions, but this is rather 
the emasculated form of his adaptor, Giovanni. 
The St. Catherine is not unlike St. Agatha in the 
S. Eufemia altar-wings (below. No. 9); she has 
braided hair similarly and her cloak falls about her 
in precisely the same way. The 'starched ' curve 
of her robe to the ground is typical of Giovanni 
alone. The donors are specially characteristic of 
Giovanni's portrait style. Their faces in profile 
and their praying hands, against a brown ground, 
form a sort of predella to the picture. On the left 
is a bearded man with a little boy in front of him: 
on the right a woman wearing a peaked net over 
the back of her head, from which hangs a grey 
shawl (as in the portrait of Placidia' and the female 
donors of S. Maria della Scala). There is strong 
external evidence for Giovanni's claim to the paint- 
ing. The village of Mezzane has belonged for 
centuries to the Veronese family of Della Torre. 
Beyond doubt their portraits appear as the donors 
in this picture. It is on record that Giovanni Caroto 
not only worked for them (Vasari describes two 
portraits— of Marcantonio and Giulio della Torre 
— which were in Verona in his day), but was their 
personal friend. Giulio was himself a dilettante 
artist, and executed a portrait medallion of^ his 
friend, Giovanni Caroto (reproduced below).^ It 

is only to be expected that the Delia Torre com- 
missioned him to adorn their church, just as 
later they called in Paolo Farinati to decorate 
«See painting No. 3 in Part I, and illustration here 

r Pf A TP I a1 

"Obverse. lOHANNES ■ CAROTVS ■ PICTOR. Portrait to 

tlie left. , , , . , , 

Rc-veisc. The painter, nude, sits at a desk drawing; beforr 

him stands a nude youth. Below OP . IV . TVR. 

Diameter, 70 mm. (Friedliinder : Italienischen Schau- 

niiinzen, 1882, p. no and Plate XX, tig. 14.) 

^^pr ^'^yf^^^^^^^^^^^m' ' ^'l^l 


I^E^' ""^ ^^fi^l^l 






(a) portrait of c;iovanxi cauoto with his wife, i'lalidia 
(detail), by himself. ML'SEO CIVICO, VFKOXA 









Giovanni Qaroto 

their villa. Francesco's picture of the Archangels 
from which the St. Paul is taken was painted 
in 1542. This altarpiece of Mezzane belongs, 
therefore, to the last decade of Giovanni's life. The 
sound, sober colour, the freshness of the landscape, 
perhaps above all tha well-modelled portraits, make 
it ci picture which will add to his reputation. 

9. Verona: S. Eufemia, Spo'verini Chapel — altar- 
win ^s. 

{a) St. Liicv and {b) St. Agatha. 

Panels. 8 ft. 8 ins. by 2 ft. 2 ins. (2,68 by ,67). 
The central picture, to which these two saints 
formed the w ngs, has been removed to the 
Museum. It is Francesco Caroto's Tliree Arch- 
angels, a picture in which he rises to true inspira- 
tion in the figure of St. Michael, and to strange 
imagination in the landscape lit with the many 
colours of a confused dream. These two female 
saints, on the other hand, are commonplace in 
compirison ; the outlines are harsh, the colour 
monotonous against the vision of the Archangels. 
They are commonly attributed to Francesco 
Caroto ; Zanandreis praised especially their 'mani- 
fest imitation of Raphael.' In point of fact they 
are both imitations of Francesco himself, and we 
venture to uphold the attribution to Giovanni. St. 
Lucy with her left arm thrown across her body and 
her right resting on a sword-hilt, recalls Francesco's 
St. Catherine (Verona Museum, No. 251) or a fresco 
of St. Michael in S. Maria in Organo. It is an atti- 
tude which has a haunting suggestionof Leonardo's 
influence. The St. Agatha with her stiffly-braced 
legs, and hand high upon her breast, is a weaker 
counterpart of the Virgin to the right of St. Ursula, 
in Francesco's fine altarpiece in S. Giorgio in 
Braida. P'rancesco's Archangels was painted in 
1542, his St. Ursula in 1545. It seems probable, 
then, that these wings were added subsequently to 
the altar. They seem, indeed, not to have been 
originally intended, and even now are unframed 
and hung in makeshift. 

10. Verona : Museo Civico, No. 446. 
Madonna enthroned with St. Zeno and St. Peter 

Canvas. 7 ft. 5 ins. h. by 6 ft. 7 ins. w, 

(2,25 by 2,00). 
The painting is a mere rag, owing to an at- 
tempted restoration of years ago. At the foot of 
the Madonna's throne is a cartellino which no 
longer bears any vestige of inscription. It is said 
to have borne Francesco Caroto's name and the 
date 1498, but Crowe and Cavalcaselle held it to 
have been a forgery.^ The Madonna in particular 
shows the influence, remote but unmistakable, of 
Giovanni Bellini. I believe that I have traced this 
clearly to a picture by the third-rate Bellinesque 

"O/cif. I, p. 485. 

artist, Girolamo Mocetto, in S. Maria in Organo.' 
Indeed, owing, I believe, to this connexion, 
Mocetto's picture still passes under an entirely 
fantastic attribution to Giovanni Caroto. This 
ruined picture as it stands scarcely allows the 
possibility of judgment, but — independent of any 
tradition — it suggests the hand of Caroto, the 
ingenious adaptor of another's compositions. 

11. Fiesole : Mr. H. W. Cannon, Villa Doccia. 
Head of a Monk. 

Panel, i ft. 2 ins. h. by i ft. w. (36 by 31). 
The portrait of an elderly Benedictine against the 
clear sky, in which the Madonna appears in golden 
light. The face and hands are very truthful and 
well modelled ; the simple scheme of the black 
habit against the flesh and the blue of the sky is 
very eflfective. Giovanni's monogram, originally 
painted on the book in the old man's hands, is 
now lost. Were the habit white instead of black 
we might be tempted to recognize here the portrait 
of Don Cipriano of Verona, general of the Olive- 
tans, which Caroto sent to Vasari at Bologna. It 
has been suggested that this is a votive picture.' 

12. Budapest: Gallerie des Beaux-Arts. No. 153. 

Madonna with Saints. 

Canvas. 4 ft. 11 ins. h. by 3 ft. 10 ins. w. 
(1,51 by 1,16). 
Mr. Berenson has attributed this picture tenta- 
tively to Giovanni Caroto. It is signed ' leronimo 
de Bri.xia, 1541 ' (or 1547), and Lederer has accord- 
ingly attributed it to Girolamo Savoldo of Brescia: 
he is supported by Dr. Gabriel de Terey, director 
of the gallery, and by Gustavo PVizzoni. Fabriczy 
and Carlo Gamba have hazarded Girolamo da 
Santa Croce, in spite of the signature. A picture 
by Savoldo actually replaces Giovanni Caroto's 
work in S. Maria in Organo, the direct influence 
of Moretto is clear in at least one picture* by 
Francesco Caroto, but there is no evidence that 
either of the brothers stood in such intimate rela- 
tion to Brescian painters as to co-operate with 
them in their work. 

12a. See footnote '". 

'See B. B.iron. 'Girolamo Mocetto, Painter-Engraver," in the 
' Bollettino' of Verona Museum, IK (1909), p. 90. 

sj. P. Rictiter. 'A Descriptive Catalogue . . , Villa Doccia.' 
1907, p. 60. 

"St. Ursula in S. Giorgio in Braida, Verona. Cf. Moretto's 

St. Ursula in S. Clemente, Brescia, and replica in Castello 

Sforzesco, Milan. 

'"Verona : Via Madonna Terraglio, No. 9 (Signor Vignola) — 

ground-floor room . 

Madonna Enthroned with St. John tlie Baptist and St. 

Fresco. 3 ft. 11 ins. h. by 4 ft. 11 ins. w. (1,20 by 1,50). 
This unattractive fresco was formerly attributed to Gioltino. 
Indeed, the coarse, ugly faces, with their lanky, wet-looking 
hair, as well as the harsh colour, certainly suggest his style. 
On the other hand, the general characteristics of drapery and 
figure seem Carotesque. The large feet with very long toes 
are especially reminiscent of Francesco Caroto in the Spolverini 


Giovanni Qaroto 

n. Verona: Duomo — third altar, left. 
Triptych : Miulctiiui and Saints. 
Panel. Each -:; ft. h. by i ft. 2^ in. \v. (91 by 


The altarpiecc has fared badly in the course of 
its history. .As it now stands it is a polyplych of 
four panels of saints and a predella ; as such 
Mr. Berenson" has attributed it, with a query, to 
Giovanni Caroto. 

A careful examination reveals many discre- 
pancies. To begin with, the predella, consisting 
of four scenes from the Life of the Virgin in a 
single panel, is a characteristic and beautiful 
example of Francesco Morone. In the second 
place, the St. Michael at the apex of the altarpiece 
shows itself to be a rather clever modern adapta- 
tion by Zannoni, added when the present altar 
was arranged by Abbot Gottardi in 1880. We 
have to deal then only with the lower part, the 
three panels forming the main triptych. These 
represent the Madonna in the centre, St. Jerome 
on the left and St. George on the right. 

Even so, the anomalies of the altar are by no 
means exhausted. A stone at the feet of St. Jerome 
bears the date (certain) M-DXXXI in small black 
figures ; the panel of St. George is 
signed in medium white letters, thus: NiDXXxUl 
This is contemporaneous with the /^q 

painting. Veronese historians of '^''^ n r .,. 7 ^ 
record very obscurely the vicissi- IX L N Z. N o 
tudes of the altarpiece.'- On one 
thing at least they seem to agree— that the 
original picture was a triptych consisting of the 
panels as we see them to-day. These they assume 
to be the only known work of a painter, ' Antonio 
Bcnzone'. Unless we accept this view we must 
suppose the inscription to record the name of the 
donor, surely in a most unusual form. The patrons 
of the altar were, moreover, the Cartolari family, 
well known and influential in Verona for many 
generations ; they would scarcely encourage the 
intrusions of the Benzoni. The sepulchral monu- 
ment of the Brenzoni is, in fact, in S. Fermo 
Maggiore, Verona : sculptures of about 1430 by 
the Florentine Rosso and kesco, Annunciation, by 
Pisanello. Who, then, was Antonio Brenzono or 
Benzone ? His name, as is common to most 


Chapel at S. Eufemia, Verona, both in the altarpiece [Tlirce 
Archangels ivith Tobit) and in the frescoes on the walls (Story oj 
Tobil), which he decorated in 1542. The fresco is not worthy of 
Fr.-incesco.and it now goes under the name of Giovanni Caroto, 
an attribution possible, but certainly without convincing 

n B. Berenson, ' North Italian Painters,' etc., p. 191. 

li Dal Pozro, op. cit., describes it in 1718 ; at the time of 
Biancolini (' Notizie storiche delle chiese di Verona', 1/49) it 
had already been replaced by a St. Micharl of Prun?itti. Da 
Persico, op. cit. (1820), notes enigmatically that it was in the 
chaplain's sacristy in its original frame combined with certain 
other works. Zanandreis (1831), op. cit, says it was sold. 
Rossi (' Nujva Guida di Verona", 1854) saw it in the sacristy 
a^ain. To-day it occupies its original place. 


names of the period, admits of various spelling. 
The second letter in the signature is so slightly 
indicated that no one until quite recent times has 
remarked it at all. In the Veronese anagraphs of 
the time there are no less than six families of 
Brenzone, but not a single member of them all 
was called Antonio. No priest of the name occurs 
in the canonical register of the Duomo. Only in 
the ' Estimi ' of Verona for the year 1531 there 
was, in the city district of Falsorgo, an 'Antonius 
Benzonus scutellarius', and in that of San Quirico 
an 'Antonius ferrarius q. Baptista Benzoni' — 
neither of them mentioned as a painter. The name is 
known elsewhere in the province of Verona : wit- 
ness the village of Casteletto di Brenzone on the 
Lake of Garda. Anotherdifficulty — acareful exami- 
nation of the three panels makes it questionable 
whether they form the original triptych. The 
central panel and the left wing (St. Jerome) are 
certainly the work of one hand. A rather ungainly 
Madonna with the Child straddling on her knees 
sits before a dense green bush. Behind her, blue 
mountains rise into a yellow sky which spreads 
upwards into deepest blue. St. Jerome, with his 
crucifix and rosary, stands before the same con- 
tinuous background broken by a large tree. These 
two panels form parts of one picture and are dated 
1 53 1. In the right wing stands St, George, in 
Roman armour, red cuirass, red helmet with white 
plume, green skirt, dark green greaves and sandals 
with a red sphinx in front. A red-brown cloak 
of clumsy folds waves from his shoulder. In his 
right hand he holds a red and white lance, in his 
left a shield with the cross. A certain showy 
elegance and gaudy colour contrast him with the 
heavier and more sober figures of the other panels. 
The background consists of mountains with ruined 
arches in the middle distance, but is not con- 
tinuous with the rest of the triptych. This panel 
was painted two years later and bears the name of 
Antonio Brenzono. The two homogeneous panels 
of 1 53 1 proceed from an artist of the Liberale 
tradition. They resemble somewhat the maimer 
of the very obscure painter, 'A. D. Vendri ' 
{vide a signed Madonna, 1518, Verona Museum, 
No. 157), who spans the gap between the paint- 
ing of Liberale and of Cavazzola, the youngest 
adherent of the school of. Morone. They might 
easily be by the hand of Giovanni Caroto, though 
there is no quite tangible evidence in his favour. 
One accidental reference tends to connect him 
with the mysterious Brenzone. The eighth and 
last complimentary sonnet added to the post- 
humous edition of his book ends thus : — 

' O fortunata voi, Bianca Brenzone, 
Col gran Carroto, per cui havrete il vanto 
Mille e mill' anni sovra I'altre belle.' 

It has not been possible to trace the relationship 
of Bianca and Antonio Brenzone, nor is Caroto's 

portrait of the lady known to exist at the present 
time. The painting of St. George, of 1533, is 
probably by another hand, though by a very nearly 
allied one. It seems strange, in view of the fact 
that the altar is dedicated to St. Michael, that no 
picture of him is included ; the modern addition 
to the triptych and the altarpicce of Prunatti 
which once replaced it supplied this conscious 
defect. Is it possible that a St. Michael was 
planned or even painted for the right wing, that it 
was never carried out or met with some accident, 
and that the St. George — only recognized work of a 
dilettante, Antonio Brenzone, pupil or imitator of 
the original artist — was substituted for it ? In the 
presence of so many doubts and possibilities 
speculation is vain. 


Besides the pictures mentioned above, Vasari 
speaks of [a) ' several saints ' in the Church of 
S. Bartolomeo (since ruined) and a portrait of 
Laura delle Schioppi, the donor ; (6) the two 
Delia Torre portraits (see No. 8, above) ; (c) a 
Madonna — in the prior's room of the Monastery 
of S. Giorgio; (</) Actaeon Clianged into a Stag; 
(e) portrait of Don Cipriano (see No. 11, above). 
The sonnets in Giovanni's book on architecture 
mention incidentally (a) a portrait of his brother 
Francesco ; (6) a portrait of Catelina da Sesso ; 
(c) a portrait of Bianca Brenzone. A catalogue 
of a private collection " in Verona in 1815 includes 
a Madonna with St. Rock and St. Sebastian in half- 
figure (I ft. by I ft. 3 ins.). 

It is singular that, though Giovanni seems to 
have been known chiefly as a portraitist, so little 
of this side of his work is known to us. Probably 
portraits by him still exist in Italian private pos- 
session ; not impossibly the breast-portrait of a 
young man in Brussels Museum (No. 517) and 
the two excellent portraits of monks in the Verona 
Museum (No. 142) and the collection of M. Georges 
Chalandon, respectively, are attributable to the 
younger instead of to the elder Caroto. 


The only known drawings of Giovanni are those 
in the MS. of the book on architecture" for 

"Collection of Giorgio Albarelli : Verona; Bibl. Comm., 
MS. 1847. 

"Verona; Bibl. Comm., MS. 978. Torello Saraina ; ' Le 
historic di Verona nuovamente tradotte alia lingua volgare (da 

Giovanni Qaroto 

which he did a preface (on the Verona amphi- 
theatre), as well as the illustrations. The drawings 
are partly pasted in, partly drawn in the MS. 
itself ; some are large folded sheets. They are 
twenty-one in number, and, except for a 
portrait of the artist fby another hand ?), and 
three pen-sketches of Verona, consist of measured 
drawings of Roman architecture in Verona. The 
sketches of the city with figures in the foreground 
are rough but spirited work. The list of drawings 
follows ; unless otherwise stated, they are of the 
full size of the page of the MS. (14 ins. by 9J ins.). 

1. View of Verona from the south. Ink. Double-page. 

2. Portrait of Giovanni Caroto (lOVANNO CKROTOj. 
Chalk clumsily re-touched with ink. 9 ins. by 5J ins. 
[Pl.\te I, B.] 

3. P. }ii. Measured capital and base of Arco Leoni. Ink, 

4. P. 38. Folded section of Teatro Romano (' Teatro posto 
soto il castelo '). Ink and wash, touched with white, pricked 
for transfer. 14 ins, by 31 J ins. 

5. P. 39. Fragment of cornice, etc. (' friso e cornice e 
arcitravio de l.arco p. Valerius cecilius '). Ink. 

6. P. 52. Measured capital (' capitelo del teatro'). 
Reverse. Keystone with bull's head from Teatro Romano 

(' In il czastelo di s. pero '). Ink. 

7. P. 53. Measured frieze, etc. (' in czasa d m/ Torelo 
Saraina'). Ink. 

8. P. 55. Measured capital. Ink touched with white. 

9. Pp. 65-83. Inscriptions on fragments, tombs, etc (headed 

10. P. 84. Corner with pediment and frieze (' Fronte aspicio 
de larco di vitruio '). 

Reverse. Fragment of pilaster (' primo pilastro de larco di 
vitruio'). Ink. 

11. P. 85, Elevation sketch of arch (' Ibidem '). 

12. P. 87, Capital and plan (' chapitelo de larco e la basa de 
la colon con il suo basamento di vitruio '|. Ink. 

Reverse. Niche with female figure (' Nigio de larco di 
vitruio'). Ink and heavy wash with much white. 

13. P. 88. Perspective drawing of Arco di Gavi ("larco di 
vitruio '). 

Reverse. Moulding and pediment, etc. (' per testa de larco, 
pianta de larco di vitruio '). Ink. Folded. 

14. P. 8g. Capital, etc. (' pilastro e arco de . . . '). 
Reverse. Capital, etc. (' capitelo e basa e pedestal de larco de 

tito '). Touched with white. 

15. P. 90. Perspective view of the arena from east (' 1 anfi- 
teatro '). Ink. 14 ins. by 15J ins. 

16. P. 91. Plan of the arena. Ink. 13J ins. by I5jins. 

17. P. 65. Sketch of pilaster decoration. 

18. P. 96. Perspective drawing of Porta Borsari (' larco di 
santissimo galieno '). Ink. 14 ins. by iijins. 

19. Capital and base (' capitelo de larco de s. Santissimo 
Galieno'). Ink. 

20. P. 98. Sketch of Verona — ? from Porta San Zeno. Ink. 
14 ins. by 19I ins, [Plate II, c] 

21. Same as above — fragment. 6J ins, by SJ ins. 

G. Saraina), 1546,' published in 1851. For the many editions of 
woodcuts (rom Caroto's drawings cf. Vignola in ' Bollettino' of 
Verona Museum, I (1908), p. 98, et scq. 




'NLY a few years have passed 
, since attention was first drawn 
to the art of the great German 
1 artist, who represents tlie 
German temper and German 
art as scarcely any other but 
^Diirer can be said to do, and 
jwliose personality is the most 
rudimentary, and at the same time the most 
distinctly racial among German artists of the 
fifteenth centurj'. In spite of the strenuous 
efforts which have been made to penetrate 
into the life and work of this unknown artist, 
he is still the great anonymity whom we are 
accustomed to call the Master of the Amsterdam 
Cabinet or the Master of the Housebook. A 
fresh, invigorating atmosphere emanates from his 
works, the spirit of an artist of almost modern 
feeling, a progenitor of Goya and Felicien Rops, a 
frank, joyous World-child (Weltkind), and on 
the other hand a deep thinker, a romancer, a 
teller of stories with an inexhaustible wealth of 
invention and composition. In him, the rare 
spirited irony and inventive charm of an emotional 
poet alike captivate us. 

He first became known to connoisseurs as an 
engraver on copper. Bartsch, Duchesne, Renou- 
vier, Passavant, Wilson and Bryan had seen in 
him an engraver of the school of Van Eyck. 
Through Ma.x Lehrs's wonderful publication of 

the International Chalco- 

became at one stroke 

the history of art.' His 

number), and in addition 

his collected works for 
graphical Society, he 
a centre of interest in 
engravings (ninety in 

about thirty-two copies by the Master of the 
Monogram JSxS and Israhel V^an Meckenem, are 
distinguished in the first place by the greatest 
rarity ; while no less than si.xty of them are unique. 
Maybe these striking facts accord with his crea- 
tive temper, for even in the character of his 
technique, he shows himself in more than one 
respect a pioneer and progenitor. 

By the use of the dry point, with which he 
aimed at hitherto unattained results, his en- 
gravings throughout make, with their sketchy 
execution, an impression of etching, which he still 
further strengthened in the works of his old age 
by an emphasized cliiaroscitiv technique. Develop- 
ment can clearly be traced throughout his crea- 
tions, yet we must guard against defining certain 
epochs too sharply, especially as regards limiting 

1 Translated for the author. 

2 Of general literature on the Master may be mentioned 
Flechsig ('Zeitschrift fiir bild. Kunst,' N.F. VIII, 1897) ; Lehrs 
(' Jahrbuch der preuss. Kunstsamml.,' XX, 173); Geisberg 
(' Kheinlande,' IV, 132); Valentiner ('Jahrb. d. pr. Kunsts.,' 
XXIV) ; Hachmeister (' Heidelberger Dissertation,' iSgy) ; Kruse 
(' Studier Tillagnade Henrik Schiick,' Stockholm, 1905) ; Bock 
• Heibeiikun^t," 1909). 


or extending them by dales. ^ Indeed in his 
undoubtedly earlier engravings, for instance The 
Good Shepherd (L 19), The Four Prophets (Li-^), 
The Eccc Homo (L 20), The Conversion of SI. Paid 
(L 41), we meet with uncertain and loose drawing 
which continuously and quickly disappears {e.g., 
The lll-inatchcd Lovers, L 55-6, etc.), and following 
the path of a steady and secure display of his 
technique — in works like St. Martin (L 38), The 
Idolatry of Solomon (L 7), Aristotle (L 54), Love 
Scenes (L 72, 73, 75) — leads up to his latest and 
maturest works, in which linear execution of un- 
precedented freedom makes the modelling and 
chiaroscuro of exquisite, picturesque fineness. 
These works give, especially in the advanced 
drawing of the landscape, the effect of impressions 
quickly jotted down, which more than once 
bring the name of Rembrandt to our lips. To 
this are due his magnificent engravings, The 
Crucifixion (L 15), The Adoration (L 10), Tlic 
Circumcision (L 11), Tlie Holy Family (L 28) — 
only to mention a few of the most important. 
These, indeed, show not only an immense advance 
in form, but also, perhaps, an even higher degree 
of conception, for the Master had discovered a 
new world. Himself a Weltkind sprung from the 
people, he carries us with him through the varie- 
gated life and activity of his agitated times. He 
regarded the world with open, penetrating eyes, 
and has created in his engravings a mirror of the 
life of man. He gives us lively pictures of the 
life of the people ; peasants on the way to 
market, vagrants, bag-pipers, and riotous com- 
pany. With him we meet monks sitting in their 
cells among heavy folios, nuns telling their beads, 
children playing in careless enjoyment. Further 
on he introduces us to the life of gallant knights 
and squires setting out to hunt, or intoxicated 
with love, caressing maidens in sunny meadows. 
Dreamlike charm and gracious intimacy vibrate 
through his scenes. The true legendary note, 
the pure echo of folk-songs, greet us from many 
of his engravings.* Wild men and spectre-like 
forms course through his woods. The poetry and 
fantasy of Bocklin are here anticipated. Deep 
earnestness speaks in his presentment of the 
Memento Mori. A youth parades, crowned with 
roses, with gleaming eyes ; then Death accosts him 
grave and silent, lays a cold hand upon his shoulder 
and gazes long and deep into his eyes. All worldly 
splendour must pass. Thus three princes ride a- 
huntmg, jesting merrily; suddenly three frightful 
skeletons step in their path and cast in their faces 

^ A chronological division of the Master's work has recently 
been attempted by C. Glaser (' Monitshefte fiir Kunstvvissen- 
schaft,' III, 145 ff,), with whose remarks I am substantially in 

* For the popular elements in the engravings see Storck 
' Monatshef e fiir Kunstwiss.,' Ill, 243). 



(r. AMI L 1 I \ nils \\ A I.KING. Uh'AWINCS OF THK sCHlldL 

) sr. JIAKTIX, bNt.KAMM, 

C^^c C5^t*c 


(k) the EX'IORTATlnV, KUPFERSTU'll K Alll M- T,' BEKUN' 


The Master of the Amsterdam Qabine 

the transitoriness of all worldly things. This pre- 
sentment of Les Trois Moris et Trots Vifs is the 
most grandiose of all the many others. 

We learn also to look for satire in him. On 
two precious pages he has pictured the power of 
woman, to whom even Solomon and Aristotle are 
in subjection. With rare humour he gives to the 
sprig of nobility an ill-smelling onion for an 
heraldic emblem and to the delicate high-born lady 
a thick radish. He handles the traditional religious 
subjects with manifold variations, enlivens them 
and lends them new and popular features. 

Lightly sketched, as if jotted down with a pen, 
these engravings prognosticate in him a master 
of drawing, and in fact it has been found possible 
to assign to him a goodly number of drawings. 
Formerly he was considered the sole master of the 
mediaeval Housebook, in the possession of the 
Prince of Waldburg-Wolfegg-Waldsee, and he was 
therefore designated the Master of the Housebook.^ 
That is not quite in conformity with the fact, since 
only a small part of the drawings are from his 
hand, although all the remaining drawings breathe 
his spirit and came to life in his workshop. The draw- 
ings are absolutely the best that German Art before 
Diirer produced: many a time they surpass Diirer 
in their insouciant lifelike presentment of human 
life. Purely as illustrations of the history of 
civilization they are of peculiar importance. The 
seven planets give different representations of 
human life. There we see conjurors perform- 
ing their tricks ; criminals before the judgment- 
seat ; other criminals already dangling in the 
air from the gallows; there we watch the gold- 
smith in his workshop, the painter before his 
altarpiece, the sculptor busy at his work in stone : 
these dwell under the protection of Mercury. 
Frau Venus rules over another and gayer world ; 
fashionable squires pay court to dames in stately 
attire; more intimate are the scenes of the 
bath-house and of the Minneburg (or rather of a 
mediaeval bordel). Again, other pictures introduce 
us to the warlike exercises of the time. They 
must have had some reference to the Emperor 
Frederick III, since on one page his device 
A E I O V appears. Tourneying, hunting, battle 
scenes, the emperor's camp — everything is depicted 
with equal love and freedom. Latterly a series of 
other drawings^ in different collections have been 
attributed to the Master. It is possible without 
much trouble to arrange them in the order of his 
artistic development. 

5 ' Das Mittelalterliche Hausbuch,' published by Essenwein, 
1887. The representations of planets were well edited by Lipp- 
mann for the International Chalcographi;al Society (1895). On 
the different hands that have taken part in the production, see 
Storck (' Monatshefte f. Kunstw.,' Ill, 284 ff.), and Bossert 
(' Kunstchronik,' 1910, Sp. 350). The division lately adopted by 
Naumann (' Repertorium fur Kunstwissenschaft,' 1910, 294 ff.) 
does not strike me as successful, 

« On the drawings and the existent literature on them see 
Storck ('Monatshefte fur Kunstwiss.,' II, 264 ff.) 

To the early period of his productions belongs 
a large drawing [Plate 1] (here published for the 
first time with other drawings [Plate II, B, c], 
see note),' in the University library, Erlangen 
(I B 15; 16,7 X 27,6). It represents a charming 
young couple inspired by the same spirit which we 
have already learned to recognize in the engravings 
of the Master. A young knight is mounted 
on his steed ; a beautiiul young woman stretches 
out her hand to bid him farewell. This page 
in its special relations finds its place without 
question in the general series of his work. We 
meet with the same type of young man in the 
engravings {e.g., 1, 57, L 70, L 71, L 85) ; the 
peculiar inclination of the head, with the rich, 
flowing, curling hair, the somewhat mischievous, 
penetrating eyes are already long known to us, 
and the young beauty also has her sisters — 
comparison need only be made with The 
Departure to the Hunt (L 72). Yet we cannot 
ignore the great awkwardness and stiffness which 
exist here in the formation of the hands and 
arms, in the lack of substantial appearance in the 
bodies, and in the woodenness of the horse ; but 
these are special weak points in the Master, and 
stand in peculiar contrast to the wonderful obser- 
vation shown in the dogs. Further in the awkward 
rendering of the extremities examples from the 
Master's earlyengravings (L 54,58,71) can be found 
for comparison ; but these might be due to the 
clumsiness and inexperience of youth. We must 
not, however, reject the idea that this page 
may be only a copy of more masterly work. 
At all events, it fits in remarkably with the 
Master's ceicvre, and finds its proper place be- 
tween the St. George (L 34) and the St. Martin 
(L 38) [Plate 11, aJ. A rough drawing which 
exhibits many similar clumsinesses, is, in my 
opinion. The Woman with the Veil, in the Musee 
Wicar ^ at Lille. After having examined and appre- 
ciated this charming page in the original, 1 must 
pronounce with emphatic certainty for its authen- 
ticity. Certainly, many affinities to the Master E. S. 
show themselves, but that only corresponds with 
and confirms our view of the artistic development 
of our Master, who must have reached his prime 
under the Master E. S. and still for a long time after 

'In the University library at Erlangen are to be found yet 
more drawings of the Hausbuchmeister Circle. Two of them 
are reproduced here as particularly fine examples of an artist 
coming very near to the Master, but possessed of a thoroughly 
independent technique and draughtsmanship. Other drawings 
of his school are to be found, among other places, at Basel, 
Karlsruhe, Vienna and Wiesbaden. I shall go on to speak of 
these later in a moaograph on the Master. Perhaps I ought 
further to mention a copy of the armorial bearings in the 
' Hausbuch ' which is in the public art collection at Basel 
(U. I, 2). The Two Pcasanh Dancing, at Basel, Weimar, 
Dresden, etc., which are often mentioned in connexion with 
our Master, are somewhat further removed from his art. 

8 This drawing seems to be in some relation to the miniature 
(i486) in the [Jnivetsity Register at Basel, which Daniel 
Burckhardt has published as Schongauer (' Jahrb. d, K, preuss, 
Kunstsamml.,' XIV, 164), 


The Master of the Amsterdam Qabinet 

'^emained a grateful follower of his art. From this 
dra\vii\£; then there is no long step to the Princess 
Ch-odcl'iiuhi in the Kupferstichkabinet at Dresden, 
which has also been acknowledged as genuine by 
Lehrs— and further, to the pages of drawings also 
to be found there, A7);rf cvid Page as Armour, 
bearer, and its reverse King and Queen, which 
Friedliinder was the first to claim for our Master. 
Both are clearly sketches for glass painting. 

A singularly beautiful and important example 
of the Master's skill in drawing is given by the 
precious miniature in a codex of the Heidelberg 
University library (Cod. pal. 83) of the year 1480, 
the poet Johann von Soest, offering /lis n'ork to 
the Count Palatine, Philip the Frank. This charm- 
ing page also has instructive analogies with the 
Erlangen drawing of which I have spoken above. 
Still, this page issurpassed by the Berlin silver-point 
drawing of the Lovers Standing, which has long 
since been acknowledged as belonging to our 
Master. It is quite unintelligible how, in this fine 
drawing, people have tried to recognize the hand 
of an imitator of the Master: it is true that 
the frank mischievous look of the gleaming eyes 
reminds us of the two supporters with their 
cajoling expression on The Planet Sol of the 
Hausbuch. There is the same masterly hand in 

With the silver-point in Berlin is closely con- 
nected another — unluckily — unfinished silver- 
point at Schloss VVolfegg, which I shall publish 
soon. The Master is revealed at his finest period, 
which we can fix about 1480. 

The drawings which follow next show, quite 
in correspondence with his development as an 
engraver, a progress and increasing freedom in 
technique as appears from the obviously whole- 
sale imitation of Schongauer, in the free and vivid 
drawing The Adoration of the Kings, a pen drawing 
in the Veste at Coburg," and still more the Cruci- 
fixion in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris, dis- 
covered by Peartree. To one of the more advanced 
periods belongs the charming instructive subject 
in the Berlin Kupferstichkabinet, which has been 
explained as The Father's Warning to his Sons 
[Plate 1 1, e]. The very free and spirited technique 
corresponds with the later engravings throughout. 
It is yet freer in the contemporaneous drawing, y^;i 
Archer, also in the University Library at Erlangen 
(I. C. 26), which I likewise desire to be the first to 
attribute to the Master '" [Plate 1 1, D]. It is dated 
(14)85 and bears an unmistakable signature and the 
inscription 'Stee, Stee.' It needs, indeed, no circum- 

9 This drawing also is a design for a window-pane. One 
can also point safely to finished glass work based on designs of 
the Master. I have come across such in Frankfurt, Munich 
(Bayer. Nat. Mas.) and Weimar (Sammlung Dr. Grafe), which 
indicate some affinity with the art of our master. 

>» Meanwhile Naumann ('Kepert. f. Kunstw.,' 1910, p. 30-) 
has mentioned the two drawings and attributed them to the 
Master of the Amsterdam Cabinet. 

stantial demonstration in order to make good this 
attribution. The two drawings are placed side by 
side here in order to enable the reader to compare 
them conveniently. For further comparison we 
may take the archers delineated in Tlie Planet 
Jupiter of the Hausbuch. These arc. in my 
opinion, not from the hand of the Master of 
the Amsterdam Cabinet himself, but rather by 
some fellow-worker of a like spirit. How much 
greater and more alive is the Erlangen Archer, the 
Master's own work ! 

Apparently the last drawing known to us is 
The Man Walking, which rightly belongs to the 
more advanced period of the artist, as is indicated 
by the date ' 1500,' which, in my opinion, is old. 
I must confess that I have many times had doubts 
as to the genuineness of this drawing, which, how- 
ever, on my last examination of the original were 
again set at rest. 

Lately yet another interesting drawing of a 
goblet has been justly ascribed to the Ma-,ter by 
Geisberg;" it proves a fact, formerly denied, 
that the Master had been engaged in goldsmiths' 
work. We continue to progress still in our know- 
ledge of this great artist. It is likewise a fact, 
ascertained recently, that he also has worked in 
woodcut. The edition of ' Der Spiegel Men- 
schlicher Behaltnis,' which was published in 
Speyer by Peter Drach, by its unexpected pro- 
ficiency in drawing, reveals our Mister, ex ungue 
teoneui}'- It is impossible to demonstrate here the 
great significance of these works, through which 
the Master's creative power has received so much 
elucidation, and which, in the many-sidedness of 
this power, give him already a place beside Diirer. 
For the artist was, as investigation has already re- 
cognized for some years past, certainly also active 
as a painter, and a series of works have been proved 
to be his which form a close group." These 
indeed strike us, in comparison with the direct 
originality of the engravings and drawings, as of 
a conservative character, and in the quality of the 
painting certainly take no prominent place among 
the works of his contemporaries. Indeed, we meet 
in them old-fashioned qualities and a demureness 

" ' Monatshefte fiir Kunstwissenschaft,' III, p. 381. 
^- On an inquiry h.iving been circulated by E. Flechsig, this 
view was supported by Kiimmerer, Storck, Voss and Geisberg 
in the • Cicerone' (1910, pp. 71—4. and 190—4). There has just 
appeared a sumptuous edition of the collected woodcuts 
(• Studien zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte,' 126), with a spirited 
introduction by Naumann, which is unfortunately mistaken, in 
my opinion, in the criticism of the Hausbuchmeister, but shows 
fine feeling and good judgment in the estimation of the import- 
ance of the woodcuts. 

13 On the Hausbuchmeister as a painter there is literature by 
Flechsig ('Zeitschr. fiir bild. Kunst. N.F., VIII ; Niedliinder 
Repert. fur Kunstw.,' XVII, 270; XIX, 387); Hanel (' Helbings 
Monatsberichte,' III, 174); Lehrs (' Jahrb. d. preuss. 
Kunstsamml.,' XX); Ranch (' Hessen-Kunst,' 1909); Thode 
('Jahrb. d. preuss, Kunstsamml.,' XXI) ; Voss ("Zeitschr. f. 
bild. Kunst N.F".,' XIX); the same ('Cicerone,' II, 1910, 
p. 192) ; and I myself am about to publish the altarpiece of St. 
Gjar ill the ' Mon.itshcftc fiir Kunstwissenschaft.' 


The Master of the Amsterdam Qabinet 

which seem antithetic to his spirit. The apparent 
contradiction is explained ' when we assume — and 
we are fully justified in doing so — that the draughts- 
man with the supple and delicate needle in his 
hand, achieved what yet remained impossible to 
the painter, oppressed by custom and technical 
difficulties. In his etching he is a daring pioneer ; 
in his pictures he keeps, in essentials, fast hold of 
tradition, though those works also show specially 
light handling and a fully developed aerial 
perspective.' (Henry Thode.) 

His earlier pictures," a Madonna, in private 
ownership at Munich, the St. Anna Selbdritt at 
Oldenburg, as also the altar-wings in the Museo 
Civico at Venice, show us the development of his 
style of painting from the Schongauer school in 
its widest sense. The Trial of Christ at Venice 
shows unmistakable affinity to the panels of Caspar 
Isenmann at Colmar. The pictures are full of 
traits which assert the authorship of the Haus- 
buchmeister. The pictures of his middle period, 
the chief of which I consider are the Monnt Calvary 
at Freiburg (with the wings belonging to it in the 
possession of the Suffragan-bishop, Knecht, also 
at Freiburg) and those which undoubtedly belong 
to the altar at St. Goar (The Crncifixion, The 
Annnnciation, Saints, The Delivery of the Keys to 
St. Peter) ; The Crncifixion at Darmstadt and Tliree 
Angels at Basle ; and further the gve3.t Resnrrcct ion 
of Christ at Sigmaringen, can only be thought of 
as under the influence of the Lower Rhine School. 
We have with good reason imagined for our Master 
a journey to the Netherlands.which in 1476 led him 
down the Rhine and made him, and others also, ac- 
quainted with the art of the Master of Tlie Life of 
Mary. With these works should rank the Madonna 
between Saints at Munich, and the Four Saints in 
the Stadtmuseum at Frankfurt, which without 
doubt originated in the entonra^e of the Master, or 
rather in his workshop itself, without his having 
ever laid hand to the actual completion of them. To 
a later period would then belong The Mourning over 
Christ at Dresden, The Adoration of the Child at 
Schleissheim,'^ and the pictures by his own hand of 
The Life of Mary at Mainz. In them, an artistic 
freedom, and above all a progressive art in the 
construction of the landscape, are remarkable. 
In general, his paintings are distinguished by 
almost laborious drawing and linear execution 
which yet stand in a certain antithesis to the 
artistically free stroke and drawing of his later 
periods. Only here and there something of 
the living and boldly intellectual character which 
we admire elsewhere in the Master forces itself 

"The Death of Marv, in the Wallraf-Richartz Museum at 
Cologne, which Voss (' Monatshefte fur Kunstw.,' 1909, p. 538) 
has published as an early picture of the Master, I, after a 
searching examination, can only admit to be a school-piece. 

"There is in the collection of the Prince of Waldburg- 
Woltegg a preliminary sketch lor the Schleissheim picture, 
which I shall publish shortly. 

upon us. It seems to me not impossible that much 
of the stiffness and uncouthness may hz attributed 
to the hand of fellow-workers. This is certainly the 
case with the six Mainz panels {The Presentation 
of Mary, The Annnnciation, The Visitation, The 
Presentation of Clirist, Pentecost and Christ before 
the Elders) which, by the date on the panel of 
The Annnnciation, may be fixed at the year 1505. 
For the Master must have had a workshop full 
of ardent energy, as is proved by the numerous 
altarpieces which may be recognized as works of 
his school, in St. Stefan at Mainz, at Gelnhausen, 
Aschaffenburg, Seligenstadt, Bossweil (now re- 
moved to Speyer) and elsewhere. The last- 
mentioned pictures are of the contemporary 
class of religious easel-painting, and scarcely 
indicate any important advance in the presentment 
of the religious subject-matter. 

We have seen, however, that the Master's own 
sphere of creation lay in the painting of genre. 
Are there no paintings extant which show him 
to us as a painter from this side also, which is 
so characteristic of him ? To this question the 
answer comes as a very sad surprise : there is 
only one solitary picture of that class which can 
with certainty be referred to the Hausbuchmeister, 
and that is the Lovers at Gotha, one of the most 
pleasing of German pictures : — ' this fine fashion- 
able youth with the light-coloured hair, on which 
a wreath of wild roses rests, this modest maiden 
with the rose in her hand, who listens, lost in 
dreamland, to the languishing whispers of her 
beloved — who, to the very movement of her finger 
is — in the modern sense of the word — graceful.' 
The colour is rather hard, it looks to me as though 
a second hand had taken part in the technical 
execution. That is the single priceless document 
of his genre-painting. Within the confines of his 
art may still perhaps be allowed to have sprung the 
Allegory of Life and Death in the Germanisches 
Museum at Niirnberg,'" and the Love Charm at 
Leipzig, which obviously goes back to a Van Eyck 
pattern, but yet breathes something of the spirit 
of the Master of the Amsterdam Cabinet. 

A strange fate has denied us even to this day the 
name of this highly important artist and the place 
where he worked. Attempts have been made to 
identify him with the most various artists, and to 
impose on him their names — Gillikin van Overheet, 
Zeitblom, Holbein the Elder, Wilhelm Pleydenwurff, 
Erhard Reuwich, Nikolaus Schit, Lucas Cranach, 
Martin Hess and Heinrich Lang. Not one of these 
has withstood critical examination, and it remains 
left to chance that we may one day arrest the 
fugitive. The scene of his activity has been deter- 
mined with appro-ximate certainty from researches 

'* With regard to the allegory, see Storck (' Zeitschrift fiir 
bildende Kupst N.F.,' XXI, p. 302). The Love Charm at Leipzig 
is called ' school of Van Eyck,' by Kammerer, Durand-Greville, 
and Weale. 


The Master of the Amsterdam Qabinet 

in art-history : it is the middle- Rhine country with 
Mainz, Frankfurt, Speyer, and Heidelberg for 
centres. At Heidelberj^ the Master was employed 
by the Electoral court, as we saw ; and in the 
Mainz- Frankfurt district all those school- works 
are contained which demand unconditionally his 
active presence in that region. It is not impossible 
that the Master wandered northward from the 
Upper Rhine and received from the Masters of 
the Richenthal Illustrations a fruitful stimulus 
towards a lively style of painting; as Bossert 
has emphasized at different times. Certain it is that 
he received great inspiration from the two Masters 
of Engraving, E.S. and Schongauer. But in 
proportion as he was impressed by foreign art, 
he freely and characteristically worked up and 
assimilated those impressions, and there is hardly 
another artist who can match him for native 
originality and uncommon quickness of fancy. 
His own influence has reached effectually as far 
as Niirnberg and inspired the Master of the 
Peringsdorfer altarpiece. Perhaps he had among 
his pupils the great artist who illustrated the Herpin 



(a) Mr. Russell Flint 's drawings vary much in 
quality. His frontispiece, the view of Oxford, and 
the ' fir-topped Hurst ' are perhaps the three best. 
Undoubtedly the worst are ' The Dark Iberians' 
and ' The Dorian Water.' Mr. Russell Flint is 
not a great draughtsman, and his sense of colour 
is, to say the least, turgid. Illustrations apart, the 
book is well produced and of good format, (b) 
Mr. Robert Hichens has ' written up' the Holy 
Land and made an absorbing book of it — and that 
without jarring by reckless treatment of sacred 
things. It was a happy thought to call in M.Jules 
Gu^rin, whose illustrations are an effective height- 
ening of the text. They have a gaudy magnificence, 
backed by a broadly mystical feeling, which the 
travelled are always ready to associate with the 
East. The artist has often exaggerated the colour, 
but in line he has truthfully conveyed a suggestion 
of the extraordinary beauty of town and desert, (c) 
In this, the N"" edition of Edward FitzGerald's 
masterpiece, the task has devolved upon Mr. A. 
C. Benson of summarising all the best that has 
been said by way of introduction. He has done 
it well, but his sober preface contrasts strangely 
with rather immoderate decorations and pictures 
by Messrs. F. Sangorski and Sutcliffe. These do not 
at all succeed in conveying the spirit of Omar's 
quatrains, (d) Mr. A. Sangorski is responsible 
for designing and illuminating a sumptuous edition 
of Stevenson's Prayers. And the same note of 
excess predominates, a turbulence of whirling 
gold, wholly opposed to the spirit of the book. A 
word of praise must not be grudged to the very 

manuscript now to be found in the royal library 
at Berlin." The latter in his turn may have 
impressed the youthful Diirer in his early drawings, 
such as The Three Serving-men (L 2), The Horse- 
men (L 100), and The Lovers Walking (Peartree, 
Jahrb. d. preuss. Kunstsammi, 1904, 119). Our 
Master, who perhaps began to produce his works 
about 1465. must have lived to somewhere near 
the year 1505. But there is still no historical 
proof or evidence wherewith we can verify either 
name or place : he remains always the inspired 
Unknown of German art. Great is the cleft which 
severs him from the pious soul of a Stephan 
Lochner. His art is more worldly, more popular ; 
his temperament warmer ; his fancy more ebullient. 
He is a powerful, profane revelation of the 
Germanic spirit, and he belongs, like Diirer, to the 
small band of those whose art is the purest expres- 
sion of German life. There lies in his art already 
something of the deep-searching spirit of modern 
times — Elle a la grace, pins belle qne la beanie ! 

" See mv treatise on a drawing of the Master of ttie Herpin 
manuscript (' Monatshefte fiir Kuntwiss.,' Ill, 346), 

successful method employed in reproducing Mr. 
Sangorski's designs. (E) Miss Mitford is still a 
lively companion, who wrote better English than 
she has the credit of doing, and Mrs. Thackeray 
Ritchie sums up much contemporary reminiscence 
about her in a pleasant introduction, so that the 
present text would have been welcome by itself 
in a convenient little volume. Unhappily, Messrs. 
Methuen have overlaid it with colour-prints of 
no artistic merit and little popular attraction at 
that, as well as with many page-blocks, represent- 
ing a uniform rural ugliness neither true to nature 
nor grotesque. The book is consequently a 
'lumpish ' volume, which can only be read at a 
table, (f) Messrs. Macmillan's ' Green Willow ' 
is no less bulky and inconvenient, but with more 
excuse, for it contains lively fancies by Mr. 
Warwick Goble at least attractively drawn, 
coloured, and printed in a sufliciently European- 
ized Japanese manner to suit the charming stories. 
These have mostly been printed before somewhere 
or other, but are delightful to read again. In 
spite of Mr. Goble's attractions the stories would 
have been much better published unillustrated. 
(G) We noticed this book a year ago and are glad 
to see it again in this smaller edition, the illustra- 
tions by Mr. Warwick Goble being reduced by 
half. It would be diflicult to conceive a more 
charming edition of Kingsley's book. (h) A 
selection cunningly devised to bring out the 
more rollicking, genial side of Dickens's story. 
Mr. Frank Reynolds plays a very good accom- 
paniment. His pictures are strongly drawn and 
full of robust humour, while the gay colours 



are well reproduced. The clever editing, the 
illustrations, and the season of the year at 
which both are obviously aiming, form a trio that 
should make the book a success. (l) Mr. Everard 
Hopkins has made a bold attempt to reproduce 
the full-blooded humour of Sterne, and it is no 
shame if he has only partly succeeded. The 
pictures at least make pretty and charming things 
by themselves. (J) In the category of Christmas 
Books may be mentioned two popular 'guides ' to 
Ingres and Hogarth. Both are cleverly written, 
and give an adequate idea of the art of these 
widely different painters. Mr. Lewis Hind has the 
advantage that the illustrations he has chosen fare 
better at the hands of the process-printers. Those 
in the ' Ingres ' strike one as hard and needlessly 
oleographic. (K) Optimistic sympathy relieves 
the monotony of Mrs. Maxwell Armfield's gentle 
parables in ' The Flower Book.' Its appeal will 
also lie in twelve water-colour drawings by Mr. 
Maxwell Armfield. They show an affectionate 
appreciation of natural miniiticc. ' Daisies in the 
Dawn ' and ' Snowdrops ' might claim to be 'peeps 
into Nature,' so precisely does the artist adopt the 
point of view from which the grass-insect sees 
small herbage. Others, such as ' Tulips ' and 
' Primroses,' are not very attractive. On the whole 
is this the work which might be expected of an 
artist whose talents have already placed him in 
the Luxembourg ? (L) In the two calendars, 
representing respectively the Flower-garden and 
the Nursery, we strongly prefer the flower pictures. 
These are good examples of Eleanor Brickdale's 
work. Her colours are gay and pleasing, and the 
flowers she depicts are clearly recognizable. 
Humpty Dumpty is not. (m) The bulkiness of 
Messrs. Hodder and Stoughton's 'Hamlet' is of 
the less consequence because no one would read 
' Hamlet ' in an illustrated edition. The main 
point of the book is the technique of the colour- 
prints. Purples and aubergine shades are difH- 
cult colours to manage and it is difficult to 
preserve the clearness of scarlet ; in these respects 
the printer may be particularly congratulated. 
His success may dispense us from criticizing the 
designs, and justify us in giving him the benefit of 
the supposition that he represents them with suffi- 
cient accuracy. They are being exhibited, but have 
not as yet moved us to visit them. The best seem 
to be the result of study of Ford Madox Brown. 
(n) Mr. Sidney Meteyard's edition of the Golden 
Legend is not the type of book which we can 
honestly praise either for its illustrations or for 
the taste with which it is produced, (o) This 
reprint of the ' Virginibus ' forms the best piece 
of book-production it has been our lot to meet 
since many a day. The beautiful Florence press 
type, the good paper, the perfectly simple binding, 
the soft-toned illustrations in colour-collotype — all 
these combine to increase the bookworm's racial 

hatred of the wealthy few who alone can afford 
to possess the book. Mr. Norman Wilkinson has 
really illustrated the book, and not merely wrought 
some pleasant pictures to accompany it. The 
drawings are faithful to the text as well as very 
good examples of Mr. Wilkinson's style, his 
harmonious feeling for colour and design both 
in figure-drawing and, more especially, in land- 
scape, (p) We have also received a version 
of ' Old King Cole ' in a frankly popular form. 
The verses are broadly humorous, and the 
drawings, both in colour and in black-and- 
white, are not unsuitable to the verses, (q) New 
editions of Hans Andersen's stories are always 
popular, but the late Mr. Linley Sambourne's 
illustrations, though interesting in their way, do 
not give a very full idea of his style. 

(a) The Scholar-Gipsy and Thyrsis. By Matthew Arnold. 

Illustrated by W. Russell Flint. I2S. 6d. net, or in full 
parchment, 2is. net. Lee Warner. 

(b) The Holy Land. By Robert Hichens. Illustrated by 
Jules Guerin, and with photographs. 25s. net. Hodder 
and Stoughton. 

(c) The RubAiyAt of Omar Kh.\yyam. Illustrated and il- 

luminated by F. Sangorski and G. Sutcliffe. Cloth £l net. 
Siegle, Hill and Co. 

(d) Prayers Written at Vailima. By Robert Louis Steven- 

son. With an introduction by Mrs. Stevenson. The whole 
reproduced in colours and gold after the original illuminated 
drawings by Alberto Sangorski. 6s. net. Cliatto and 

(e) Our Village. By Mary Russell Mitford. Illustrated by 

Hugh Thomson and Alfred Rawlings. Methuen. 

(f) Green Willow. By Grace James. Illustrated by Warwick 

Goble. 15s. net. Macmillan. 

(g) The W.\ter Babies. By Charles Kingsley. With illustra- 

tions in colour by Warwick Goble. 5s. net. Macmillan. 
(h) Mr. Pickwick. Pages from the ' Pickwick Papers.' With 

illustrations by Frank Reynolds, R.I. 15s. net. Hodder 

and Stoughton. 
(I) A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy. 

By Laurence Sterne. Illustrated by Everard Hopkins. 

los. 6d. net. Williams and Norgate. 
(j) Hogarth. By C. Lewis Hind. Ingres. By A. J. Finterg. 

(' Masterpieces in Colour ' Series.) Edited by T. Leman 

Hare. Each illustrated with 8 reproductions in colour. 

2s. 6d. net, each. T. C. and E. C. Jack. 
(k) The Flower-book. By Constance Armfield. Illustrated 

by Maxwell Armfield. 7s. 6d. net. Chatto and Windus. 
(l) a Flower Calendar. By Eleanor Fortescue-Brickdale. 

A Nursery Calendar. By Paul Woodroffe., each. 

T. C. and E. C. Jack. 
(.M) Shakespeare's Tragedy of H.-imlet. Illustrated by W. 

G. Simmonds. los. 6d. net. Hodder and Stoughton. 
(n) The Golden Legend. By H. W. Longfellow. With 

illustrations by Sidney H. Meteyard. Hodder 

and Stoughton. 
(o) Virginibus Poerisque and Other Papers. By Robert 

Louis Stevenson. With twelve illustrations in colour after 

designs by Norman Wilkinson. £2 12s. 6d. net. Published 

for the Florence Press by Chatto and Windus. 
(p) The Truth about Old King Cole. By G. F. Hill. With 

drawings by Leslie Brooke. Frederick Warne 

and Co. 
(n) Three Tales of Hans Andersen. Illustrated by Linley 

Sambourne. 3s. 6d. net. Macmillan. 


We have received the first nine prints of a new 
publication, 'A Gallery of European Miniatures' 
(the set 15 guineas, separate prints 2 guineas), in 
course of publication by Mr. Franz Hanfstaengl, 




with a short descriptive account of each miniature 
in English, French and German. The work will 
include several series of facsimiles in colour of 
specimens of the chief miniature-painters of the 
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries hitherto un- 
published. The first series shows that the methods 
of reproduction employed liave been wisely 
chosen. The prints are made by a modern appli- 
cation of the old method of stipple-engraving, 
that is to say, the photogravure plate is coloured 
liy liand previous to each impression. In one or 
two instances, particularly in the miniature by 
Matthias Kern and in another by Antonio Bencini, 
the method is singularly successful in rendering 
the hard brilliance' of effect at which the Viennese 
miniaturists persistently aimed. 

The Medici Society has now published a dozen 
specimens of the new series' Popular Medici Prints,' 
at the low uniform price of 6s. net, many of which 
add to its artistic-ceconomic reputation. The most 
successful in two quite different directions are 
Francia's Eniomhmcni in the National Gallery 
and Romney's Pcrditmt Hertford House. In the 
Francia particularly, both the full tones and the 
values are well preserved. High-toned P'rench 
pictures, such as Millet's Gleaners in the Louvre, 
and Fragonard's Fair-haired Boy, at Hertford 
House (perhaps the best), are less suited to the 



HE hanging of the Chau- 
chard Collection will have 
been completed before the 
present number of The 
Burlington Magazine is 
published and it will be 
opened by the President 
of the Republic not later 
than December 15th. 

The collection has been arranged in a suite of 
rooms on the first floor of the Pavilion de Flore. 
There is a special entrance from the gardens of 
the Louvre, and another from the Rubens gallery, 
of which the gallery of the Pavilion de Flore 
overlooking the gardens is a continuation. The 
hanging of the pictures is beyond all praise, and 
M. Leprieur is to be warmly congratulated on it. 
The walls are covered with a red brocade, of rich 
and subdued tone, which makes an admirable 
background. In the long narrow gallery just 
mentioned are several Corots, Troyons, Eugene 
Isabeys, etc., with the only two Delacroi.x in the 
collection, one of which, Christ in the Practorinm, 
is a fine and important example. There is another 
version of this picture in a private collection at 
Brussels, but on a canvas larger in width than in 
height, whereas the Chauchard picture is the con- 

conditions of this series ; in fact, Vigee-Lebrun's 
Boy in Red, at Hertford House, is a failure, but the 
choice of the picture for reproduction was a mistake, 
for satisfactory reproduction would be almost im- 
possible. It would be interesting to be able to 
compare one picture reproduced in both series. 
The work in the Popular Series generally is so 
good, and the averages of the two series so near, 
that the superiority of the first series and the 
larger size seem at first sight insufficient to account 
for the greater difference in price, until we observe 
that the accessibility of all the originals yet 
produced in the Popular Series must materially 
decrease the cost of production. The size of 
the prints naturally vary, as in the first series, 
but the Popular Prints are all mounted on 
cards of one size, 19 by 14 inches. The smoke- 
coloured overmounts used for all alike, suit few 
of them really well, and rather detract from 
their air of preciosity. The other subjects now 
published are Giovanni Bellini's Doge Leonardo 
Lorando, Maroni's Tailor, Bronzino's Venns and 
C;^/);V/ (surely not a very popular subject), Gains- 
borough's Parish Clerk, and Morland's Lanndry- 
inaid, in the National Gallery ; Greuze's Girl with 
a Dove, at Hertford House ; and Millais's Sonvenir 
of Velazqnez, in the Diploma Gallery, Burlington 

trary. From the gallery a short flight of steps 
ascends to the room in which is the entrance 
from the staircase ; on each side of the steps a 
picture by Eugene Isabey gives a touch of sump- 
tuous colour. On the left of the entrance is the 
finest Troyon in the collection, an early work, 
Le Garde-Chasse, a keeper with his dogs. It shows 
what Troyon was capable of and is immensely 
superior to his later paintings ; indeed it is the 
only Troyon which I have ever felt the smallest 
desire to possess, though the desire was not over- 
whelming What a pity it is that Troyon gained 
a reputation as a painter of cows and Charles 
Jacque as a painter of sheep and poultry. 

On the right of this first room is the salon, carre 
of the collection ; here M. Leprieur has hung the 
Millets, the finest Corots and a few other specially 
fine works The Millets are among the pictures 
most worth having in the collection ; not the too 
notorious .^/;^<;/;/s, which bears ill the test of com- 
parison with the other examples of the painter in 
the collection. What there is in this picture, except 
its rather maudlin sentiment, to give it its reputation 
as Millet's masterpiece, it is impossible to say. It 
has no great qualities of any sort and its colour is 
very bad ; the pastel of the same composition, 
formerly in the Staats Forbes collection, is far 
superior. But there are two Millets in the Chau- 
chard collection which are masterpieces, La Fileuse 


Art in France 

and Le RahaUeuY ; anotlier fine work is La Bergcre, 
the most important of all in size, and there are some 
smaller works by Millet of great charm, including 
a delightful little pastel. The reputation of the 
Angeliis will be gone for ever, when once the 
Chauchard collection becomes known ; I suspect 
that it is a case of ignotnui pro magiii/ico—a.nd 
perhaps of the glamour of a preposterous price. 

There are some superb Corots in the collection 
and an extraordinary number of very large 
pictures among them. L'Amoiir desanne is one 
of the finest, but Le Moulin is also an exquisite 
example, There are certainly a dozen Corots 
quite of the first order. Daubigny and Rousseau 
are much less well represented, and there is 
nothing of either of these artists equal in quality 
to the examples of their work already in the 
Louvre, The Meissoniers are extremely interest- 
ing ; of the famous 1S14, which cost some 
fabulous price, much the same may be said as of 
the Aiigclus; it is an over- rated work, an illus- 
tration without interest. But there are some 
small pictures which show that Meissonier's fall 
from popularity is justified, if at all, only by the 
fact that he had previously been so absurdly 
over-rated. The best of them are free from that 
tightness and hardness which characterize too 
much of his work. It is miniature painting at 
its best, 

Many pictures of interest must perforce go 

without mention in this cursory notice, but 
perhaps enough has been said to show that the 
collection is an acquisition to the Louvre. Of 
course it is a pity that it was a case of all or 
nothing ; M. Chauchard's reputation as a collector 
would have been much greater if a choice had 
been permitted. But it was worth while to accept 
the whole collection in order to obtain some thirty 
or so of the pictures included in it. There is, 
naturally, a considerable proportion of the sort of 
picture that is bought by a wealthy man with no 
taste, the 'millionaire picture'; it is fortunate that 
M. Chauchard, by some happy accident, bought 
so many that are really worthy of a place in the 
Louvre. It is to be regretted that the examples of 
M. Ziem, who enters the Louvre out of due time, 
are not more representative of him at his best. 

The instalment of the Chauchard collection in 
its present quarters is only temporary, but it will 
probably have a fairly long stay in them. Much 
time will be required to put the whole of the 
Pavilion de Flore in order, and then the re- 
arrangement of the French school will be possible, 
although it does not follow that it is to that school 
that the new wing of the Louvre will be per- 
manently devoted. Meanwhile the Chauchard 
collection is shown to the greatest possible 
advantage in these pleasant, well-lighted galleries, 
with their charming views of the gardens on one 
side and the river on the other. R. E. D. 


HE new Fine Art Museum 
at Geneva which has been 
opened recently unites in 
fifty-four rooms all the art 
collections of Geneva, which 
used to be scattered over the 
town. The building and its 
_ arrangement takes into con- 
sideration the specific requirements of the place, 
and was not intended to vie with the large historical 
museums of other towns. Its object is to furnish 
the art of the day in Geneva with ideals and 
models, not necessarily to fall back upon and 
imitate, but for inspiration and profit. Primarily 
its objects are of a social-economic nature, since 
it tends to individualize the talents and concep- 
tion of modern artists, to help establish national 
characteristics and to educate the masses to an 
active appreciation of their living masters. 

The picture gallery of the university at Lausanne 
has been enriched by over a hundred paintings, 
oil-sketches, water-colours and drawings of the 
famous Vaudois painter, Gleyre. They come from 
the collection of Gleyre's friend and biographer 
Clement, and convey an excellent idea of the 
life-work of this amiable and refined, though not 
very powerful, classicist. 

The museum at Stuttgart is the only one in 
Germany, so far, which has entirely departed from 
the common style of interior arrangement in its 
rooms and has entrusted them to the modern 
interior artist-decorator, the idea being to introduce 
modern applied art in the equipment of the building. 
The first hall was designed by Prof. Pankok, 
a second by Prof. Haustein, a third, lately finished, 
by A. Rochgas. The third contains the most 
modern, pleln-air and secessionist pictures. It 
must, however, be regarded an undoubted failure : 
the attempt to harmonize the pretentious style of 
decoration with the pictures has turned out un- 
successful. After all, the old principle of arrange- 
ment which seeks to withdraw decoration into the 
second line and leave the first for the pictures 
only, remains as before the only one to be recom- 
mended. When we enter an art gallery we do so 
for the purpose of enjoying the paintings and the 
sculptures. Any attempt to tit these into a compre- 
hensive system of fine-art-decoration will always 
remain — in a public museum — diverting and dis- 

The Kaiser Friedrich Museum at Berlin has 
acquired four important specimens of late 
mediasval Rhenish carving. The earliest is a 
Madonna and Child standing upon the crescent, a 

Art in Germany and Switzerland 

little over three feet h\gh, the original colouring 
still well preserved, dating from about the year 
1500 and executed at IMaycnce, possibly in the 
workshop of Hans Bachofen. The school's ideals 
and style were derived in part from Tilman 
Riemenschneidcr, but developed towards a feeling 
for true rounded statuary rather than the relief 
style which the Wiirzburg Master particularly 
favoured. There is some grandeur in the general 
bearing and conception of the Madonna, some 
acute and prepossessing observation in the laugh- 
ing figure of the baby, and the outlines of the 
group are compact. The drapery, however, betrays 
still the gothic indulgence in endless folds. The 
seams of Mary's mantle and dress are ornamented 
with small, ingrafted button-like ornaments, a 
peculiarity pointing distinctly to Mayence and 
adopted very likely from the art of the gold- 
smiths. The second piece is a Visildlioii in 
relief, under three feet in height, likewise with the 
old paint upon it well preserved, dating from 
about 15 10. The drapery is much quieter than 
in the Madonna, and the whole looks as if it had 
been taken from a painting. A group of 7'lic 
Virgin and St. Jolin at the foot of ihc Cross (the 
Crucitix itself is missing) is a later and, as far as 
the psychological life of the figures is concerned, 
a more important piece of work. These are barely 
two-and-a-half feet high, their whole bearing is 
more heroic and the dress simpler and more 
vigorous in its folds. A St. Margaret, on the 
other hand, though scarcely later than the year 
1520, is strangely -mannered. The position of 
the Saint is alifected, the extraordinary system of 
folds in her drapery mannered, and the outlines 
restless, an effect which is increased by the 
circumstance that the artist in his aim at greater 
realism has cut out the space between the right 
arm and the waist. 

The citizens of Augsburg, who were at first 
dissatisfied with v. Tschudi's attempt to effect 
changes in their gallery, have with reason recog- 
nised the advantage. The final result will be that 
they will have a new gallery in a building more 


S we are going to press we 
hear with regret of the death 
of Mr. John Lafarge, the doyen 
of American artists. By this 
I event American art has sus- 
tained a serious loss. Even 
apart from Lafarge's produc- 
.tions as an artist, which were 
remarkable at times for a peculiar rarity and 
strangeness of colour, his was one of the most 
striking personalities in modern American life. In 
early years he was the first to arouse in America 
that keen interest in the Barbizon school, which 


serviceable than the present one, and from the 
enormous stock of old paintings in possession of 
the Bavarian Government a new collection, far 
more carefully made than the old one, will be 
formed for it. 

Domcapitular SchnUtgen, of Cologne, has pre- 
sented his collection to the city, which has 
built for it a special annex to its Museum of 
Applied .'\rts. The collection is a most unusual one 
of mediiuval and early Renaissance ecclesiastical 
objects. Dr. Schniitgen has repeated, as regards 
ecclesiastical applied arts, what the brothers 
Boisserree did almost a century ago as regards 
Rhenish painting. The new museum is arranged 
so that upon the ground floor a general view 
can be taken of the historical development 
of styles from the Roman settlements to the 
end of the eighteenth century, while the upper 
floor displays the objects arranged in groups 
according to material, etc. There is also one 
room set aside for objects of other than German 

Still another picture by Baldung has been 
secured for a museum, this time at Basle. It is a 
67. Anne xvitli the Virgin and Child under a canopy 
within a rich Renaissance hall. The Karlsruhe 
Kunsthalle possesses a drawing of the same com- 
position, whether a study for the picture or a sketch 
from it, has not yet been definitely established. 
The coloration is rich and vivid, the types of 
the faces still gothic; the figures are set before 
a golden background ; the picture must be dated 
about 1512-1515. The new spirit of the times is 
apparent in the architecture, or rather its orna- 
mental detail, and the life of the piitti who enliven 
the main group. With Durer-like playfulness 
one of them opens the leaded window, while 
another pulls off the hat of an old scribe 
(perhaps St. Joseph). The same museum has 
come into possession of the portrait of Adalbert 
von Barenfels, dated 1526, formerly ascribed to 
Baldung, but now called School of Basle only, and 
a portrait by E. Handmann. 

H. W. S. 

subsequently attracted so much of the artistic 
enthusiasm of his countrymen. Later on, a voyage 
to Japan, with which country he always maintained 
the closest ties, greatly widened his artistic outlook, 
and here, too, his influence was decided in shaping 
the course of American culture. He was a man 
of almost oriental subtlety of mind, an incisive 
and ironic wit and great force of character. His 
work has but rarely been seen in this country. He 
executed a stained glass window in St. Margaret's, 
Westminster, and some of his works have been 
noticed from time to time in THE BURLINGTON 


NATION ,/l Mi 

T V 


^n a certain i 

L i ■ '^ , 1 1 1 > ■ y » i ! 

but if any 

' d to forego 

■e asked 

and tamihantv 


"■.:■ ij'x 1 tiic national montUiicnt 
cnc II' 

UI.U lii any i^a.-L ; i. 

• fFort shoiild he spared to gauge the 
-tened public opinton 
accision by the heip oi a r.w l 
whose names do not carry wc.^^ ^ 

in the small circle to which they belong, 
ng was well enough, per- 


arr. '. 

artist to 



>rial is a melanch 

: hat occasion a de 

I c 

ion was subm. 
dish sculptor 
Mfred Steve 
of the g 




m art. 



HE question of the 
memorial statue of King 
Edward VII which we 
raised in our last Editorial 
seems to demand further 
discussion before any too 
definite steps are taken by the authorities 
concerned. As we pointed out, it is very 
much to be hoped that the difficult matter 
of acquiring a suitable design may be 
undertaken in an enlightened and liberal 
spirit. What we would suggest is to 
throw open the competition to all artists 
of the British Empire, and to hold an 
exhibition of all the designs submitted in 
some large central building — such, for 
instance, as the Imperial Institute — during 
the period of the Coronation next year. 
This would enable colonial and Indian 
officials who will then be present in London 
to select designs suitable to local require- 
ments, while it would enable those destined 
to select the national monument to have 
the advantage of public criticism and 
discussion before coming to a conclusion. 
There remains, of course, the difficult and 
supremely important question of the jury 
of selection. As we have learned by sad 
experience in the past, it is not enough to 
throw open a competition to all British 
artists without distinction, if the jury 
consists of precisely the type of official 
artist to whom in the end all such com- 
missions are given. The story of the 
Albert Memorial is a melancholy instance 
of this. On that occasion a design of real 
beauty and distinction was submitted by 
the only great British sculptor of the 
nineteenth century, Alfred Stevens, and 
was rejected in favour of the grotesque 
jumble which now fills us with shame and 
disgust. This should not recur again. The 
First Commissioner of the Office of Works 


ought, we think, to call together a jury 
of representative sculptors and designers, 
not necessarily confined to Great Britain, 
to adjudicate upon the designs. For 
instance, it should be possible to get 
M. Rodin and H. Hildebrand, as eminent 
representatives of foreign sculpture, to 
assist. It might be difficult and undesirable 
to include British sculptors upon the jury, 
since it would incapacitate them from 
joining in the competition ; but if any 
distinguished sculptors consented to forego 
that privilege, they, too, might be asked 
to help in the decision. Then, again, it 
might be possible to associate in the work 
of decision a certain number of men of 
general critical knowledge and familiarity 
with the masterpieces of older sculpture. 

But in any case it is desirable that no 
effort should be spared to gauge the 
educated and enlightened public opinion 
of the country, instead of arriving at a 
decision by the help of a few official artists 
whose names do not carry weight except 
in the small circle to which they belong. 
Such a proceeding was well enough, per- 
haps, in the last century, but the British 
public has changed materially of late in its 
attitude to art. It no longer looks upon 
art with suspicion or indifference ; it 
realizes that art corresponds to a real 
need, and that it is only through a noble 
and sincere art that it can give fitting 
expression to its common sentiments and 
aspirations. The present is pre-eminently an 
occasion upon which those feelings should 
be respected. This occasion is moreover 
exceptional. The death of King Edward 
and the coronation of King George V 
happen to synchronize with the birth of a 
new nation in South Africa. These new 
scenes, new types— a new at mosphere— 
may, we hope, produce new ideas in art. 

The Burlington Magazine, No. 94. Vol. XVIII.— January, 1911. 





''HK culture wliich arose 
among the small states of 
North Italy is in some ways 
the most typical and remark- 
able feature of the whole 
epoch which we call the 
Kenaissance. The individual 

-^ ^^ ^-'iiergy, the constant watch- 

fuhiessTand llie^ubtle intrigue by which alone 
these small states could survive, if at all, in the 
clash of contending interests, gave to their rulers 
from early times that intense belief in the value of 
the individual will and its superiority to all ethical 
considerations which has been immortalized by 
Machiavelli's genius. It was a corollary of this 
intense acceptance of Nietzschean philosophy that 
the ruler should look upon art mainly as mmister- 
ing to the pleasure and amenity of his life and the 
security of his memory. Thus there came into 
being far earlier than in other parts of Italy the 
conception of private as opposed to public art, 
and of all forms of art the portrait began to take 
that predominant position which it has never since 
lost in the eves of the rich patron. The portrait, 
and the art' patron as we still understand him— 
these were the creations of the vivid and brilliant 
life of the smaller North Italian courts, and in 
these respects Leonello d'Este of Ferrara stands 
out, if not as the first of his kind, at least as one of 
the 'most eminent examples. Certainly no other 
art patron has reaped more constant remembrance 
on the part of posterity in re-payment for his 
devotion to the arts. As though it were not 
enough to defeat envious fate that Pisanello should 
have%odelled his features again and again with 
indelible precision in bronze, and should have 
painted him at various ages, he seems to have 
pressed into his service every painter of distinction 
in the well justified hope that some at least of his 
many effigies might survive. The great portrait by 
Jacopo Bellini, painted in 1441, in competition 
with Pisanello himself, has, indeed, so far as we 
know, completely disappeared, and the same fate 
has befallen the portrait which Mantegna was called 
to Ferrara to execute, but now at last, after all these 
hundreds of years, one more record of Leonello's 
familiar features has again come to light. No dis- 
covery could well be more fascinating to the lover 
of ancient art than this portrait of Leonello d'Este 
by Roger van der Weyden. Thus to have the 
most pertinacious of patrons portrayed by a realist 
of such unbending veracity as Roger van der 
Weyden arouses intense sentimental interest, quite 
apart from the purely aesthetic pleasure which the 
picture affords. What is more, here at last we see 
Leonello in three-quarter face. It is almost as 
though we were to get a glimpse of the other side 


of the moon, thus, after all the magnificent profiles 
with which the medals and paintings have made 
us familiar, to be at last enabled to see the well- 
known features turned towards us with a more 
intiinate glance. The features are indeed 
almost exactly as Pisanello rendered them, except 
for the fact that the Marquis is older by some 
five years than in the great Bergamo portrait 
and the latest of the medals. We have the same 
clearly marked bony prominence over the eyes, 
the same delicately chiselled aquiline nose, and the 
same mouth, sensitive, refined, and slightly sensual. 
The eyes have sunken a little in the orbits ; they 
have lost something of the eager vivacity of 
Pisanello's portrait, and finally the fashion of 
wearing the hair has changed. It is no longer 
brushed back tightly from brow and temples, but 
is allowed to hang in a long zazzera over the ears 
and neck. We get, I think, appreciably nearer to 
an understanding of Leonello's character from this 
marvellous interpretation by the Netherlandish 
artist. Van der Weyden is more psychological, 
less purely concerned with the utmost rigour of 
plastic rendering than Pisanello ; for by the time 
Pisanello did the Bergamo portrait he was already 
more of a medallist than a painter, and the 
modelling of the features suggests the hammer 
and chisel of the metal-worker in the splendid 
severity and clear delineation of its planes. 

Both pictures are singularly alike in the render- 
ing of movement, in seizing the exact poise of the 
proud-spirited head, though even here Pisanello 
lays a slightly greater accent upon that courtly 
indifference, that polite and exquisite swagger to 
which only the Italian of the Ixenaissance could 
attain, and' which must have been strange to the 
more homely Netherlandish artist. The character 
as revealed by Roger van der Weyden confirms 
and emphasizes, by the Netherlandish feeling for 
actuality, the impression of the man which we 
have already obtained from Pisanello's and Oriolo's 
portraits. The shrewdness of the man of affairs 
is tempered by the refinement of the humanist, for 
Leonello was no unworthy pupil of the famous 
Guarino, and his compositions in prose and verse 
in Italian, Latin, and Greek were esteemed by his 

Though an illegitimate son of Niccolo III, he 
was preferred by his father to the legitimate heirs, 
a preference which his peaceful and successful 
reign justified. 

"The general impression is one that fits singularly 
with the iiupresa painted on the back of the panel, 
a hooded lynx which is explained elsewhere, upon 
a medal, by the motto, 'Quje vides, ne vide ' (' Do 
not see what you see'), indicating the ideal of 
astuteness, the most necessary virtue for a ruler of 


Leonello's type. Astuteness there certainly is to a 
remarkable extent, but also distinction and keen 
sensibility — self-centred and somewhat coldly 
sensual the face may be, but certainly not brutal, 
as one of the critics of Leonello's medals declares. 

The attribution to Roger van der Weyden 
requires no substantiation by details of style 
criticism ; the nervous sensitiveness of line in the 
hands and in the drawing of the oval of the face 
would alone suffice to convince us ; moreover the 
picture agrees perfectly with all that we know of 
Roger van der Weyden's visit to Italy. 

He visited Rome for the Jubilee of 1450, and we 
have evidence of his stay at Ferrara on the way 
thither. In July, 1449, Cyriacus of Ancona was at 
Ferrara, and in Leonello's study in the palace of 
Belfiore he saw already hung up a triptych by 
Roger which excited his utmost admiration ; the 
figures, he says, in the usual style of Renaissance 
art criticism ' seem to breathe as though they were 
alive,' while no less admirable seemed the garments 
of gold brocade and the coats of mail of various 
colours, the green meadows embellished with 
flowers, the foliage of the trees, the ornate porticos, 
and the splendid gateways. ' You would say,' he 
adds, ' that these things were produced not by the 
hand of an artist, but created by omnipotent 
nature.' ' Bart. Facius gives us a fuller account 
of the same picture," which he saw in the same 
place. From this we learn that the centre panel 
was a Deposition. It has been thought that this 
might be the Pietd of the Uffizi which once 
belonged to the Medici, but passed as a work of 
Memling, whose fame seems to have obscured in 
Italy that of his greater predecessor : but the 
description given by Facius does not agree closely, 
and we may well suppose that Roger left more 
than one painting among the collectors of Italy. 

We can have little hesitation in attributing to 
this visit the portrait which is the subject of this 
article. The next year Leonello died, and we may 
suppose that Roger did not come back from 
Rome by way of Ferrara, since it was only at 
Bruges, on his return home, that he received 
from Paolo Pozio of Lucca, a merchant living at 
Bruges, 20 golden ducats for ' certe depincture 
delo illustrissimo olim nostro S. [LeonelloJ che lui 
faceva fare al dito M° Roziero ' for the study at 
Belfiore.'' The sum is not a large one, and would 
scarcely represent the full price for our portrait, 
but it might have been part payment for this. 

' V. V. Colucci, Antichita Picene. B'ermo, Paccaroni, i8;6. 

= Bar[li. Facii de Viris lUustribus liber,, Florent, 1745: 
Ejus [Kogieri Gallici] est tabula altera in penetralibus 
Principis ferrarii in cujus alteris valvis Adam ct Eva nudis 
corporibus e terrestri paradiso per angelum ejecti, quibus nihil 
desit ad summam pulchritudinem, in alteris Regulus quidani 
supplex, in medio Christuse cruce demissus, Maria mater, Maria 
Magdalena, Josephus ita expresso dulore ac lacrymis, ut a veris 
discrepare non existimes.' 

3 See Venturi, 'I primordi del Rinascimento artistico a 
Ferrara,' Kiviista Storica Italiana, 18S4. 

^ Portrait of Leonello d'^Este 

At this date, then (1449), Leonello, who was 
born in 1407, would be forty-two years old, which 
agrees well enough with his appearance in the 
picture. We know that he died in October, 1450, as 
the result of a fever following an abscess in the 
head, but there is nothing in the face as seen in 
this portrait to suggest failing health. 

The painting itself is a singularly perfect 
example of Roger van der Weyden's handling, 
and in admirable condition. The coloured repro- 
duction makes a description unnecessary, except 
that it naturally fails to give fully the remarkable 
choiceness and richness of the colour. The 
colour scheme is restricted. The use of an almost 
white or ivory coloured background is very un- 
usual, and gives to the whole picture a peculiar 
distinction ; for the rest the chief notes are the 
intense deep transparent warm black of the coat, 
the warm and peculiarly Flemish brown colouring 
of the flesh which is taken up and accented by the 
brown crimson of the collar ; the only opposition 
to this dry scale of colours is given by the grey of 
the eyes and one precious note of vivid pale blue 
in the ring which he wears on his little finger. 
Leonello holds in his hands a small hammer ; so 
far it has been impossible to discover ihe precise 
meaning of this, which is doubtless another of the 
symbolic imprcse in which Leonello, like many of 
the patrons of his day, took such naive delight. 

On the back of the panel is painted with great 
skill, perhaps even by Roger van der Weyden 
himself, the Este coat of arms, supported by 
lyn.xes and surmounted by a hooded lynx. The 
arms, as Mr. G. F. Hill kindly informs me, are 
those of the Este as augmented by Charles VII, 
by letters patent, January, 1431 (1432 New Style], 
granting the three fleurs-de-lis or within a bor- 
dure indented or and gules. Thus it should be 
I and 4 azure, three fleur-de-lis or and a bordure 
indented or and gules, 2 and 3, azure an eagle 
displayed argent. The painting of the bordure is 
not clear, but such inaccuracies were common in 
Italy. Above the coat of arms is the iiiipresa 
already alluded to of the hooded lynx, and on 
either side are the initials in Gothic letters M. E., 
engaged in a knot, no doubt for Marchio Estensis. 
Above, in late Gothic lettering, are two words, 
possibly intended for 'Voir Tout.' Below is 
the word ' Francisque.' On the top left-hand 
corner the words ' Non plus Courcelles ' 
have been scratched at a later date. (See NOTE, 

P- 235). 

The present portrait, then, is one more picture 
known to have been left by Roger van der Weyden 
in Italy. Since it was discovered that the Sforza 
triptych at the Brussels Museum was not by him, 
but by his Italian pupil, Zanetto Bugatto, the Pieta 
in the Ufhzi has been the only existing record of 
the visit. It is a matter of some surprise that the 
visit of so great a master— though mention of it is 


A Portrait of Leonello cCEste 

made by Cyriacus of Ancona and Baitholomaeus 
Facius — should have left so little trace upon the 
technique and method of Italian painters. It may, 
perhaps, not be impossible that such a portrait as 
this may have influenced Filippo Mazzola in the 
composition and the rendering of his heads, but 
the likeness is superficial. 

Cosimo Tura again may conceivably have taken 
something from Flemish originals, but the most 
striking evidence of Flemish influence is the 
picture attriliuted to Bianchi Ferrari at Modena, 
though here the composition scarcely shows the 
influence of \'an der Weyden himself but rather 
some minor Flemish painter. 

What probably impressed Italian artists most 
must have been the technique of a painting like 
this, a varnish medium in which just those results 
of depth and transparency of colour which 
Northern Italian artists like Pisanello sought to 
attain through the medium of tempera were here 
compassed with far greater ease and certainty. 

Cyriacus of Ancona, indeed, declares that Roger 
van der Weyden taught painting to Angelo da Siena, 
called Maccagnino, and Galasso. Of the former's 
panels painted for the palace at Belfiore nothing 
now remains. Though it seems clear that certain 
minor kinds of painting — banners, playing-cards, 
etc. — were carried out in oils at Ferrara, no certain 
work can be. quoted before the histories which 

Tura agreed to paint for the chapel at Belriguardo. 
Of these, too, there is no longer any trace. Pro- 
bably the first existing Italian pictures in an oil 
medium date from at least ten years later, and in 
these the knowledge of the oil technique is 
more easily traced to other sources. Piero della 
Francesca would be more likely to have learnt it 
at Urbino from Justus of Ghent, and Antonello 
da Messina either at Naples or in Flanders. There 
is nothing to point to Piero della Francesca's 
presence in Ferrara at this precise date, though he 
was possibly there previously to 1450. 

Another great Italian artist may, however, be 
connected with this memorable moment in the 
history of Italian art, since if, as seems natural, we 
identify 'Andrea da Padova' with Mantegna him- 
self, he was called to Ferrara in 1449 to paint a 
double portrait of Leonello and his favourite, 
Folco di Villafora. 

Mantegna shows no trace of having been 
influenced by the sight of Roger's technical 
processes, since, with the exception of a single 
picture, and that of much later date, he never 
abandoned his tempera technique. 

It adds something to the sentimental charm of 
a work like this to picture to oneself the criticisms 
of many of the great Italian masters of portraiture 
on a painting which reveals in such perfection the 
distinctive characteristics of Netherlandish art. 


|N a former number of this 

agazine (Vol. xvii, pp. 159- 

'160) an account was given of 

'the Portrait of Charles I on a 

WJiite Horse, attended by M. St, 

Antoinc, the 

original painting at 

L^^li^ Windsor Castle and its various 


described by Van der Doort in the catalogue of 
King Charles I's collection at Whitehall in 1639 
as ' placed at this time in the King's chair room, 
in the privy gallery.' In the edition of the cata- 
logue transcribed by George Vertue from the 
manuscript in the Ashmolean Collection at Oxford, 
and printed by Bathoe, the painting is entered as 
'No. 3. Done by Anthony Vandike./ Item. The 
King on horseback, upon a yellow horse, one 
following him carrying his head-piece, which was 
the model whereby the great picture was made ; 
in a carved all over gilded frame. 3 f. z.ji f. c' 
In another manuscript of the same catalogue 
(Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 10,112), apparently in the 
writing of Van der Doort himself, the painting is 
entered somewhat differently, but as in the chair 
room at Whitehall : ' No. 2. Done by Sir Antony 
Van Dike being the first moddell of ye King the 
Create on Horseback w"^ is at y'" time in ye 
Princes' Gallery at Hampton Court. / The King 
upon a dunn horse, one following His Majesty 
carrying his head corsage, w'^'* was y** moddell 
wereby y" greate picture was made in a carved and 
all over-gilded frame./ 3 ft. 1"/- ft. 10".' In a copy 
of Bathoe's printed catalogue in the Royal Library 
at Windsor Castle, which belonged formerly to 


It is now time to 
the history of the great painting of 
Charles I on horseback in the National Gallery, 
the smaller version of the same portrait at Buck- 
ingham Palace, and other repetitions of the same 

The portrait at Buckingham Palace should be 
noticed first, as it appears to be the earliest in date 
of execution. It is painted on CcUivas, and measures 
at present 3 ft. 2 in. high by 2 ft. 75 in. wide. It 
has been often reproduced, but is given here again 
in order that the slight discrepancies between the 
picture and the large version in the National 
Gallery may be evident [see Plate]. This 
painting is without doubt identical with that 

1 For the first part see Burlington Magazine, Vol. xvii. 
p. 159 (June, 1910). 





'r. y. 

Notes on Pictures in the Royal (Collections 

Horace Walpole, Walpole lias added in his own 
handwriting a note : ' This picture is at the 
Esciirial, having been purchased by Don Alonzo 
de Cardenas, the Spanish Embassador. See De 
Piles, p. 367.' This statement by Walpole is 
clearly a mistake, for among the pictures recovered 
at the Restoration was ' Tlie King on Horseback 
upon a diinn horse, by Van Diche' (see Brit. Mus. 
Add. MSS. 17,916, f. 65). In 1688 it was at 
Whitehall, 'above stairs in the new Lodgings in 
store,' and is catalogued by Chiffinch among 
James II's pictures as ' No. 359. King Charles the 
P'irst, upon a Dun horse.' Its subsequent history, 
and notes of various copies or repetitions, which 
exist, have been well given by Mr. Ernest Law in 
his book on ' Pictures by Van Dyck at Windsor 
Castle.' There is little to add to Mr. Law's 
exhaustive account, except that the picture seems 
to have been a favourite subject for copyists while 
at Kensington Palace, and that an interesting copy 
by Gainsborough was not long ago exhibited at 
Messrs. Shepherd's gallery in King Street. The 
picture now in the Prado Gallery at Madrid, 
probably the version alluded to by Walpole, is 
only reckoned in these days to be a school copy. 

The original entries quoted all state that the 
painting now at Buckingham Palace was the 
model by which the great piece was made. The 
difference in the breadth of the picture as given in 
the extracts being due probably to a printer's 
error by Bathoe. This great piece cannot well 
be other than the famous painting now in the 
National Gallery, which was purchased from 
the Duke of Marlborough's collection at 
Blenheim Palace in 1885. This huge painting 
is too well known to need any description here. 
Well known as it is, the history of this picture 
has been given incorrectly, and in its earlier stages 
must still remain a matter of conjecture. The only 
picture of the sort catalogued by Van der Doort in 
1639 was the portrait of Charles I on a dun horse, 
as described above. The famous portrait on a 
white horse, described in a previous article, was 
hanging in St. James's Palace, where the pictures 
do not seem to have been catalogued by Van der 

At the valuation and disposal of the King's 
pictures in 1649 and the following years, there 
appears to have been three equestrian portraits of 
the King, valued as follows (as given in Brit. Mus. 
Harl. MSS. 4898 and 7352) :— 

Pictures out of y'= Beare Gallery and some of 
ys Privy Lodgings at Whitehall. 

The great peece of Vandyke being very ciirionsly 

To Mr. De Crittz and others in y" 14th 

Dividend £(iO 

Picture in y^ gallery (in Somersett House w""" 
came from Whitehall and St. James's). 
King Charles on Horseback, done by Sir 

Anthony Vandyke. Sold Mr. Bal- 
thazar Gerbier, 21 June, 1650, for 

;^200 i^200 

Pictures now remaining at Hampton Court, 
October, 1649. 

King Charles on Horseback (by Van- 
dyke). Sold Mr. Bolton, 22 Nov., 

1649, for ^40 £40 

Of these entries the last two have been shown in 
the preceding article to refer to the great eques- 
trian portrait at Windsor Castle, and the copy now 
at Hampton Court, which was sold in 1649 to a 
Mr. Boulter (or Bolton), a merchant in Foster 
Lane, and a creditor of the King. 

No specific mention is made of the painting of 
Charles I on a Dun Horse, as catalogued by Van der 
Doort. There is nothing to show which was the 
'great peece . . . very curiously done,' but it 
is hardly reasonable to suppose that in a valuation, 
which shows much discrimination throughout, a 
painting of the size and importance of the Blen- 
heim Charles I should only be valued at ;4'6o, 
whereas the Windsor portrait of equal dimensions 
was valued at ^200. The valuation, indeed, 
accords with that placed on paintings by Vandyck 
of a lesser size, such as The Three Children of 
Charles I, or, if it denotes the Charles I on a Dim 
Horse at all, it should denote the model at Bucking- 
ham Palace and not the great picture now in the 
National Gallery. At Hampton Court Palace, 
moreover, there is no record of any room being 
known as the Prince's Gallery at so early a date. 
The picture also is clearly stated to have been 
removed from Whitehall for valuation, and not 
from Hampton Court Palace, 

Facts would seem to prove that the National 
Gallery picture could not have been in the royal 
collection at all. It was purchased by the Govern- 
ment, as is well known, from the collection of the 
Duke of Marlborough at Blenheim Palace, and 
was one of the pictures acquired by the great 
Duke during his campaign in the Netherlands. 
On November 8, 1706 — on which day he arrived 
at Rotterdam— Marlborough wrote to his Duchess 
in England, saying : — 

' I am so fond of some pictures I shall bring 
with me that I could wish you had a place for them 
till the gallery at Woodstock be finished, for it is 
certain there are not in England so fine pictures as 
some of these, particularly King Charles on Horse- 
back, done by Vandyke. It was the Elector of 
Bavaria's and given to the Emperor, and I hope it 
is by this time in Holland.' 

This letter, to which attention was first called by 
Peter Cunningham in 'The Builder,' for February 
20, 1864, led him into the erroneous statement that 
the picture was acquired by Marlborough 'at 
Munich, through money and cajolery,' a statement 
repeated by Sir George Scharf in his catalogue of 
the pictures at Blenheim Palace, and adopted by 


Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections 

Mr. Ernest Law and in tlie catalogue of the 
National Gallery. The picture was, however, 
never at Munich, and Marlborough was not at 
Munich during the campaigns of 1706-1708, when 
his headquarters were for the most part at The 
Hague. The picture formed part of the royal or 
unperial collection at the palace of Tervueren, 
near Brussels, where the pictures belonging to the 
regents of the Netherlands, the Archduke Albert 
an'd the Archduchess Isabella Clara Eugenia, as 
well as of their successor the Archduke Ferdinand, 
Cardinal Infant of Spain, were preserved up to the 
time of the dispute as to the Spanish succession, 
a dispute which had, as it would appear, important 
bearings on the history of this picture. 

At the death of Charles II, King of Spain, in 
1700, his vast possessions were divided among 
various claimants. His next heirs were the 
children of his two sisters, of whom the elder had 
married her first cousin, Louis XIV, King of 
France, and the younger, another first cousin, 
Leopold I, Emperor of Germany. The latter's 
daughter married the Elector of Bavaria, and it 
was her son, the Electoral Prince, to whom by the 
f^rst Partition Treaty of October, 1698, the 
sovereignty of Spain, the Indies and the Nether- 
lands was assigned. The electoral Prince, 
however, died in 1699, before the King of Spain, 
so that a second Partition Treaty was required by 
which the sovereignty of Spainand the Netherlands 
was assigned to the Archduke Charles of Austria, 
younger son of the Emperor Leopold by his 
second wife, to the exclusion of the younger son 
of Louis XIV, and of the Elector Maximilian of 
Bavaria, whose son was another clain^ant to a 
share in the imperial inheritance. Hence arose 
the wars of the Spanish succession, during which 
the Netherlands became, as it were, the cockpit of 
Europe. Brussels saw many owners during these 
troubled times, and the pictures and works of art 
in the royal palaces were the prey of successive 
invaders. Marlborough's victory at Ramillies in 
May, 1706, drove the French for a time out of the 
Netherlands, and, entering Brussels as a con- 
queror, Marlborough proclaimed the Archduke 
Charles there as Charles III, King of Spain. In 
1708 the French again invaded the Netherlands, 
and in the campaign which raged round about 
Brussels, Marlborough, aided by General Cadogan, 
gained the great victory of Oudenarde, and again 
entered Brussels as a conqueror, where he was 
treated as such by the Council and Deputies of 
State who then governed that city. 

In 1705 Marlborough had received by Act of 
Parliament a grant of the palace and manor of 
Woodstock, on the site of which Blenheim Palace 
was subsequently erected. During his campaigns 
in the Netherlands the Duke neglected no oppor- 
tunities for acquiring pictures to adorn the gallery, 
which was to be a feature of the new palace. The 


pictures in the palace at Tervueren were practically 
ownerless, and the Emperor Joseph I, whose debt 
to Marlborough's military skill was incalculable, 
was, no doubt, glad to put the pictures at 
the conqueror's disposal. If the dates be 
correct Marlborough had already made his 
selection from Tervueren in November, 1706, when 
he wrote to the Duchess about the portrait of 
Charles I, by Van Dyck, but as the new house was 
not ready to receive the pictures, it was not until 
May, 1708, that the Duke, then at Brussels, sent 
General Cadogan to Tervueren to bring up certain 
pictures to the royal palace at Brussels for in- 
spection. From these, according to information 
kindly supplied by M. Henri Hymans, formerly 
Chief of the Royal Library at Brussels, the Duke 
and the General selected five pictures by Van Dyck 
and Rubens to be retained, for which a receipt 
was given by Cadogan to M. Le Roy, the super- 
intendent of the Chateau of Tervueren. The 
whole transaction seems to have been carried out 
with ceremony and care, and in no way to have 
been due to " money and cajolery," as Marl- 
borough's enemies evidently wished to make 

The two paintings by Van Dyck thus selected 

by Marlborough were His British Majesty Charles 

Stuart and A Queen of England. The latter was 

evidently the portrait of Henrietta Maria in a 

white dress and pink ribbons, similar to that at 

Windsor Castle ; it was purchased at the Blenheim 

sale in 1885 by Lord Wantage and is now at 

Lockinge Park. The Portrait of Charles I must 

be the picture now in the National Gallery. It had 

belonged, perhaps, to the Archduchess Isabella 

Clara Eugenia, who sent her portrait as a gift to 

Charles I and may have received his portrait in 

exchange. It was, however, 'probably a gift by 

similar interchange of portraits to the Archduke 

Ferdinand, the Cardinal Infant, who succeeded 

Isabella as regent of the Netherlands, and made his 

official entry into Brussels in 1634, at which Van 

Dyck was present. It is clear that the portrait of 

Charles I was in the possession of Ferdinand at 

Brussels, for it was copied almost exactly by 

Caspar de Crayer, the archduke's court painter at 

Brussels, the archduke's portrait being substituted 

for that of Charles I ; this copy is now in the 

Louvre at Paris. As the Archduke Ferdinand 

died in 1641 the original portrait must have been 

in the royal collection at Tervueren before that 

date. It is just possible that it may have been at 

Hampton Court Palace in 1639, as stated in Van 

der Doort's original draft catalogue, quoted above, 

but as this statement does not occur in other 

manuscripts of the same catalogue, it was either a 

clerical error of Van der Doort's, in confusion with 

the second version of the Charles I on a white 

horse, which seems to have been always at 

Hampton Court, or else it was in 1O39 that the 

Notes on Pictures in the Royal Collections 

picture was sent over as a present to the regent of 
the Netherlands, whose portrait as Cardinal Infant 
of Spain was among those in Charles I's collection 
at the time of its disposal in 1649. 

It should be noted, as Mr. Ernest Law pointed 
out, that in the original portrait at Buckingham 
Palace the words on the tablet are CAROLUS 
REX MAGN.?; BRITANNI.*;, whereas on the large 
picture in the National Gallery the inscription 
runs CAROLUS i rex, the addition of the i 
could hardly have been added during the King's 
lifetime. Certain other alterations are obvious in 
the National Gallery picture. The King's figure is 
slightly reduced in size, to the advantage of the 
picture as a whole, but hardly to that of the King, 
since the weight and importance of the heavy 
Flemish cheval de manege is thereby enhanced. 
The King's features have been corrected, and the 

vizor of the helmet is closed. The landscape 
background is more decidedly Titianesque, and 
the whole pictorial effect seems to be based in 
friendly rivalry on the great equestrian portrait of 
Charles V at tlie Battle ofMiihlbcrg by Titian, which 
Van Dyck must have seen in the imperial collection 
at Brussels. 

It would appear, therefore, to sum up, that the 
picture was a commission from Charles I to Van 
Dyck ; that the original study was retained by the 
King, but the great piece, or amplified painting, 
was sent as a present either to the archduchess, or 
to the Cardinal Infant, as regent of the Nether- 
lands, probably to the latter, as the style of paint- 
ing indicates a rather later date than 1634, the 
year in which Isabella died ; and that it remained 
in the palace at Tervueren until it was handed over 
to the Duke of Marlborough. 


N the issue of The Burlington 
Magazine for August last,' Mr. 
Claude Phillips made 2l Madonna 
with T'lvo Donors [see present 
Plate, d] at the Hermitage the 
subject of a detailed and sug- 
^•^C J? gestive discussion, as a result of 
^ ■ fci which he arrived at the con- 

clusion that the picture, in all probability, is one 
of the last works by Vittore Carpaccio. Loth as I am 
to disagree with so eminent a connoisseur as Mr. 
Phillips, I have so strong a conviction that there is 
a solution of the problem which is preferable to 
that suggested by him, that 1 cannot resist the 
temptation of setting forth what is my opinion in 
the matter. I can, however, claim no originality 
for the attribution in which I believe, as it was 
proposed already some forty years ago by Messrs. 
Crowe and Cavalcaselle. The artist to whom 
they assign the painting under notice is Andrea 

There is certainly a great deal of resemblance 
between the general aspects of Lord Berwick's 
delightful Carpaccio and the Hermitage picture, 
and details like the pose of the male donor and 
the horseman in the middle-distance (a favourite 
motive of Carpaccio's) only enhance the impression 

' See BURLINGTOX Magazine, Vol. xvii, p. 261, s.qq. 

^Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 'A History of Painting in North 
Italy,' Vol. i, p. 280, n. 2 : ' Better than this [i.e., a picture in the 
Communal Gallery at Padua] is a full-length Virgin between a 
donor and donatrix, No. 122 in the Hermitage at St. Petersburg. 
The Child is a repetition of Previtali s in its earliest form, 
slender, short-necked, and large-htaded ; the touch rich, and 
almost sloppy ; lights and shades well contrasted. This is 
probably Previtali's at a moment when he hid some resem- 
blance with Cariani. Unhappily, the surface here is greatly 
injured. The donor to the right is completely renewed, and 
the flesh in all parts restippled to a tomato red. The distant 
landscape is the best preserved bit in the picture,' 

of affinity between the two works. Yet to my 
mind they also show very essential differences. 
Lord Berwick's picture makes upon me pre- 
eminently the impression of a vast and luminous 
landscape, in which the figures — not excluding 
the Madonna, St. Joseph and the donors— only 
play a subordinate part. In the Hermitage picture 
stress seems above all laid on the foreground 
figures, and the landscape only serves to fill up the 
gaps left between them. But Mr. Phillips would 
ascribe the Hermitage picture to the very last 
3'ears of Carpaccio's career, that is to say, would 
separate it from Lord Berwick's picture by an 
interval of some fifteen or twenty years. Now, 
one great difference between the later works of 
Carpaccio and the Hermitage picture seems to me 
to be that the former are rather thinly painted and 
very hard and dry in tone ; whereas the latter 
shows a thick impasto and very rich and deep 
colours. And yet another fact, has, I think, to be 
remembered in this connection, Carpaccio's later 
paintings, for all their shortcomings in other 
respects, show the artist perfecting himself at least 
in this, that his design gets more calculated and 
effective ; witness the Stoning of St, Stephen in the 
Stuttgart Gallery, dated 1520* and the St. Paul 
in S. Domenico at Chioggia, of the same year. 
Yet as a composition, the Hermitage picture is, 
above all, commonplace ; and it seems therefore 
a prion difficult to associate it with the last works 
of Carpaccio. 

If, on the other hand, we turn to the works by 
Previtali it would seem to me that analogies, both 
general and particular, with the Hermitage picture 
offer themselves in great number. The facture and 
colour-scheme are this artist's, and the composition 
^ Not 1515, as usually stated. 


A ^ Sacra Conversazione'* in the Hermitage 

strikes no discordant note with his style ; 
even more, tlic relation of the figures to the space 
is that especially favoured by him. The structure 
of the Infant Christ's body, His large, square head, 
curly hair, and short, upturned nose may often be 
paralleled in Previtali, but recall more especially 
— as already remarked by Crowe and CavalcascUe — 
the Child in Previtali's earliest dated work, the 
charming Mniloiiiiii of 1501 in the Museo Civico 
of Padua (No. 439) [Plate, c]. The oval of the 
Madonna's face, the cut of her features and her 
expression are also very characteristic of Previtali ; 
compare, for instance, T/te JlLnloinia icith a Kiiccl- 
iii'i Donor in the National Gallery (No. 695) 
[Plate, a]. The two donors, for all their 
Palmesque look, are akin to Previtali, the head of 
the lady coming especially close both in form and 
conception to that in a Sacra Conversazione in the 
Imperial Gallery at Vienna (No. 14) [Plate, b]. 
The group of the Madonna and Child shows, no 
doubt, a certain resemblance to that in Carpaccio's 
St. Thomas Aquinas in the Stuttgart Gallery ; but 
it is even more intimately related to that in 
Previtali's Virgin and Cliihl with Tioo Donors in 
the collection of the Conte Albani of Bergamo* ; 

* Reproduced in ' L'Arte in Bergamo e I'Accademia Carrara,' 
Bergamo, 1S97), p. 24. 


while the action of the Madonna in placing her 
hand on the shoulder of the male donor seems but 
a variation of that in the above-mentioned picture 
in the National Gallery in which she taps the 
kneeling friar on the head. The two pictures by 
Previtali, here reproduced, and many others of 
his works will also yield close analogies to the 
treatment of the draperies and of the landscape in 
the Hermitage picture. 

I may, perhaps, add that on my last visit to the 
Hermitage, with the works of Previtali as studied 
in Italy and elsewhere still fresh in my recollection, 
I looked at this Sacra Conversazione with special 
attention, and could then see no objection to its 
being ascribed to that able and earnest, if some- 
what dull and prosaic, Bergamasque. If it is by 
him, it would seem that the broad handling and 
the imitation of Palma in the donors clearly prove 
it to belong to the later phase of Previtali's career, 
when he had become a convert to the ideals of the 
new generation of painters. That at the same time 
it may contain some reminiscences of Carpaccio 
I do not want to deny ; but, as far as I can see, 
the resemblance to Carpaccio is episodic and 
superficial, while the bulk of essential charac- 
teristics point to Previtali. 

' BJ ECTS of use in our industrial 
and utilitarian age ordinarily 
possess very little artistic cha- 
racter. Logic requires them to 
be simple and devoid of super- 
fluities ; for that very reason 
' they are too often devoid of 
J charm or beauty. The work- 
man of the present day is only wanted to produce 
them under the cheapest conditions, and to adapt 
them as much as possible to the uses for which 
they are intended. Such objects, therefore, which 
formerly varied according to the localities where 
they were made, now resemble each other in every 
particular. However, a few examples, only too rare, 
have still preserved some originality, but that is 
fast disappearing. In the number of these must be 
placed the yokes of the draught-oxen which are 
used in the districts bordering on the Minho and 
the Douro, in the northern provinces of Portugal. 
Alone among the products of popular rural 
industry, if we except pottery, these ox-yokes 
retain a well-defined style of their own. Besides 
these, it is impossible to discover any utensil which 
is really interesting and shows true originality 
and artistic feeling. Up to the present time, at 
any rate, the peasant of the north of Portugal 
would on no account consent to use other yokes. 
1 Translated for the author. 

But before proceeding further, I must describe 
these yokes. In reality, reduced to their simplest 
expression, they are nothing but lengths of wood 
designed to fit the necks of single oxen or of two 
harnessed abreast, and pierced in the middle in 
order to receive the end of the pole of the cart or 
waggon which they are intended to draw. 

Most of the yokes of the Minho and Douro 
districts are much fretted and display very common 
primitive, geometrical designs, zigzags, saw-teeth, 
meanders, palmettes, bands, billets, volutes, sprays 
net-work, embryonic vases, flowers, foliage and 
usually, in the midst of the central panel, a cross, 
or a sort of monstrance. Though they resemble 
each other in their decorative motives, they differ 
patently in their forms and dimensions, according 
to the districts and villages where they are in use. 
Some are high, some low, some straight, some 
swollen at the centre and finished at the extremities 
with a band of wood raised like a spur. Some 
are in wood merely sunk, carved and engraved, 
others are in marquetry ; sometimes even they 
may be found partly painted, generally in white. 
Some again are surmounted with little tufts of 
more or less rigid bristles. Certain critics, among 
others Joaquin de Vasconcellos in his 'Arte deco- 
rativa portugueza,' claim that the ornament of 
these yokes is remotely archaic, inspired by 
primitive national feeling, and borrowed from 


(l) maiidnxa ami cmi.ii wnii a imSi 






A -sacka conversazione' in the hermitage 



Ox-Yolrs in the North of T^ortugal 

flowers naively conventionalized and very slightly 
characterized, together with Christian signs and 
emblems which were added on the introduction 
of Christianity into the ancient Lusitania. Must we 
recognize in tiiesc decorative motives the still lively 
evidence of a vanished civilization, the artistic /or- 
7»;;/c7t', moreor less enfeebled, of a people whose very 
existence is semi-fabulous, their ancestral heritage 
enduring amid new and different conditions? 
Must we, in these circumstances, return to the 
formulae of the ancient Egyptian god, Osiris, 
renewing himself indefinitely like the sun, and thus 
aflirming the law of eternal regeneration ? Is it 
reasonable to seek, in these simple yokes of every- 
day use, reminiscences of the art of those mysteri- 
ous cities, Citania, Sabroso and Britevicas, recently 
re-discovered by the learned Martino Sarmento, of 
which the antiquity may recede, we know not how 
far, into the night of time ? The engraved beams 
and sculptured pillars of the houses of those 
prehistoric Pompeiis display designs very near 
those of the northern Lusitanian yokes and 
strikingly analogous to the remains discovered at 
Mycenae, which are probably of Tyrian or Cartha- 
ginian origin. The crosses, disks, billets, and 
volutes which constitute the most frequent motives, 
are again found identical on the ancient Irish %iclac 
of the Isle of Man, and on the squared or discoid 
stelae of the tombs in the cemeteries of the Basque 
people settled on both slopes, west of the Pyrenees 
on the Franco-Spanish frontier. I hav^e alreadysaid 
that every province, every district, every village has 
its peculiar yoke, and a countryman can always 
locate without error or hesitation the origin of each. 
The yokes of the Minho district are not those of the 
Douro ; those in use on the farms of Braga differ 
from those in the neighbourhood of Gunnaraes. 
The last, for instance, borrow their decoration, 
more than the others, from the local flora ; a little 
further off they are reminiscent of the Moorish 
occupation. From this it might seem as if the 
Mycenian character of the decoration of these 
yokes had become considerably debased, at least 
as regards its pre-historic element. Nothing of 
the kind — in their ensemble it still remains pre- 
dominant. A few details added in the course of 
centuries, a few quite modern, even contemporary 
accretions, such as a vase or a torsade, are not 
enough to alter materially a character so firmly 

All the yokes, with scarcely any exceptions, are 
modern, in fact contemporary work. An ox-yoke 
lasts in use for twenty or, at the most, thirty years. 
If any ancient ones exist, they are rare. A few 
more or less worn out or decayed might be found, 
and are found sometimes among other lumber in 
stables or lofts, but generally, once disused, they are 
burnt ; like the peasants of other nations, the 
Portuguese are not inclined to keep useless objects. 
That there are scarcely any ancient yokes left is a 

matter of no importance. The new ones are 
repetitions, exact reproductions, of those which 
they replaced. The artistic education of the work- 
men who make them is of the most elementary 
kind ; in fact it is to a certain extent impossible 
for them to make changes ; indeed, it would be 
imprudent to do so on account of their customers. 
These artizans, then, have no other object than to 
produce yokes similar to those which they are 
required to replace, to repeat in their decoration 
the same symmetrical elements, in the same 
arrangement, in the same fixed and, so to speak, 
immutable order. 

Whether the ox-yokes of the northern provinces 
of Portugal are in their essence Phoenician, Cartha- 
ginian, Mycenian, or Celtic, as they might quite 
well be, I leave to others the task of deciding. 
The essential point is that they are superb and bear 
striking testimony to the persistent instinct and 
taste of the race. It is impossible to meet in the 
streets of Pardo, of Braga, of Gunnaraes, on the 
highways and by-ways of the country districts of 
the Minho and the Douro, the teams of great 
brown oxen, with their long, curled, menacing 
horns, harnessed to these yokes and driven by 
their wild, swarthy drivers, without stopping to 
contemplate them, without feeling oneself trans- 
ported to times very long past. 

Some of the yokes are constructed for a pair of 
oxen and some for one beast only. Of those 
intended for a pair, one is illustrated here [Plate, 
a], of Mycenian character, on which the ornament 
consists of circles, some linked and ' voided,' the 
others concentric or enclosing a six-pointed 
star, with foliage, flowers and lozenges. At its 
two lateral extremities are thin crosses ornamented 
with four pairs of leaves and set in a vase ; in the 
centre is a rayed cross. It is in two shades of 
colour, the flowers and certain other details 
being painted in dead white, and the ground left 
its natural colour. This is a pattern much used 
on the banks of the Minho. A second [b] more 
generally used in the immediate neighbourhood 
of Oporto bears decoration which is perhaps more 
primitive, simply sunk with the knife, in a pattern 
in which straight lines predominate, except at the 
edges, which are slightly curved. Its character lies 
especially in its numerous perforations. As in 
the preceding example, on its centre space is re- 
presented the rayed cross or monstrance, in this case 
surmounted by a second cross, with the date 1891. 
The third [c], which is found especially in the 
extreme north, is much fretted like the others 
and bears more homogeneous ornament, particu- 
larly sprays of flowers and foliage ; like the two 
first, it bears a cross in the centre, in this instance 
trefoiled. The fourth and fifth [Dand e], intended 
for one ox in single harness, consist of a bar 
surmounted at each end by a sort of beak, and 
raised in the middle in the form of a trapezium. 




HE art of painliiii^ nowadays 
is as confused and uncertain 
in its aims as the art of poetry 
was in tlie eighteenth century. 
We have learned that the 
proper end of poetry is the ex- 
pression of emotion, to whicli 

all reasoning and statement of 

fact should be subsidiary; but we have not learned 
that painting should have the same end, using 
repri?sentation only as a means to that end, and 
representing only those facts of reality which have 
emotional associations for the painter. In primi- 
tive pictures, it is true, we look for the expression 
of emotion rather than for illusion, and that is the_ 
reason why so many people get a real pleasure 
from primitive art. They judge it by the right 
standard, and ask of it what it offers to them. But 
from modern pictures they demand illusion — that 
is to say, the kind of representation they are used 
to ; and when they do not get it they accuse the 
artist of incompetence. There is a prevalent notion, 
based upon the history of art in the fourteenth and 
fifteenth centuries, that painting must always 
advance in fulness of representation, that when it 
does not it is deliberately retrograde. But that 
notion is refuted by the facts of the modern history 
of painting. Ever since Turner, at least, the best 
painters have constantly sacrificed representation 
more and more to expression, and have been 
reviled for doing so. The Impressionists them- 
selves, though they represented some new facts, 
discarded many old ones. Their very name is a 
token of their refusal to be bound by any laws of 
representation. But their aesthetics were confused 
by their scientific interest in the new facts which 
they chose to represent. Their advocates often 
talk as if the whole business of a painter were to 
produce the illusion of sunlight, as if sunlight 
were the essential fact without which no picture 
can be a work of art. Thus they ignored one set 
of facts for the sake of another set, not for the 
sake of expression. They did not give the artist 
freedom, but imposed a new bond.age on him. 
They never arrived at the truth that to painting, 
as to poetry, no facts are essential, that all are 
subsidiary to expression, and therefore may be 
represented or ignored as the artist chooses. This 
is the truth upon which the art of the Post- 
Impressionists is based ; and to distinguish them 
from the Impressionists we might, perhaps, call 
them Expressionists, which is an ugly word, but 
less ugly than Post-Impressionists. 

Their art, of course, is not necessarily good 
because it is based upon a truth, but we must 
grasp that truth before we can judge their art 
fairly, and if once we grasp it we shall see that the 
task they set themselves is not an easy one. When 
Wordsworth tried to rid his poetry of all that 

rhetoric which had been eniplnyeil by the poets 
of the eighteenth century to hide the prosaic nature 
of their subject matter, there were many critics 
who said that he was trying to conceal his own 
incapacity by pretending to despise skill in versi- 
fication. They also reviled him for the meanness 
and ugliness of his work, and the most popular 
poet of the day sided with them. There is a 
passage about Wordsworth in one of Byron's 
published letters in which an important word is 
left blank, but anyone can guess what it is, Byron 
hated the art of Wordsworth as he loved rhetoric. 
He could not see that Wordsworth was at least 
trying to do something far more difficult than 
anything which he himself attempted, and he 
noticed only Wordsworth's failures, which were 
obvious just because he would not conceal them 
with rhetoric. 

So the failures of the Post-Impressionists arc 
obvious because they do not attempt to conceal 
them with irrelevant feats of representation. Their 
only end is expression, and when they do not 
accomplish that they accomplish nothing. If 
Cezanne, Gauguin, and Van Gogh were charlatans, 
they were like no other charlatans that ever lived. 
If their aim was notoriety, it is strange that they 
should have spent solitary lives of penury and toil. 
If they were incompetents, they were curiously 
intent upon the most difficult problems of their art. 
The kind of simplification which they attempted is 
not easy, nor, if accomplished, does it make a 
picture look better than it is. The better their 
pictures are, the more they look as if anyone 
could have painted them who had had the luck 
to conceive them; in fact, they look just as easy 
as the lyrical poems of Wordsworth or Blake. 

But we must not suppose that a painter, if his 
aim is expression, need have no power of repre- 
sentation. On the contrary, a much more 
thorough mastery of facts is needed to make 
them expressive than to represent them without 
expression. We all know that it is easier to 
describe persons or things when we have just seen 
them for the first time than when we know them 
well. For at first sight they arouse in us the 
interest of curiosity which is easily expressed in 
mere description. 

But when we know them well this interest wears 
off ;md changes either into mere boredom or into 
an emotional interest which is difticult to express 
in description. Now the interest expressed in 
much impressionist painting is only an inti^rest of 
curiosity. The painter represents facts that he 
has only just noticed. He is like a clever journalist 
who makes an article out of his first observations 
of a new country. But the aim of the Post- 
Impressionists is to substitute the deeper and more 
lasting emotional interest for the interest of 
curiosity. Like the great Chinese artists, they 

have tried to know thoroughly what they paint 
before they begin to paint it, and out of the fulness 
of their knowledge to choose only what has an 
emotional interest for them. Their representations 
have the brevity and concentrated force of the 
poet's descriptions. He does not go out into the 
country with a note-book and then versify all that 
he has observed. His descriptions are often empty 
of fact, just because he only tells us what is of 
emotional interest to himself and relevant to the 
subject of his poem; and they are justified, not 
by the information they convey, but by the emotion 
they communicate through the rhythm and sound 
of words. The Post-Impressionists try to represent 
as the poet describes. They try to give to every 
picture an emotional subject matter and to make 
all representation relevant to it. Hence the formal 
or decorative qualities of their pictures, which, 
like the formal qualities of poetry, are the result of 
expression. We hear a great deal about decorative 
painting in England; but our decorative painting 
is often a mere imitation of the Italian primitives. 
People like it, as they like modern imitations of 
Elizabethan verse, because it reminds them of 
beauties with which they are familiar. But the 
decoration of Gauguin and Van Gogh and Cezanne 
does not remind us of familiar beauties ; rather it 
startles us at first sight because it does not express 
a mere admiration of Italian primitives, but the 
artists' own emotional experiences. Nothing could 
be more unjust than to accuse them of imitating 
any kind of primitive art. If they have qualities 
in common with the great primitive artists it is 
because they have the same aims. But the very 
accusation is based upon a misunderstanding of 
primitive art. The ordinary admirer of Giotto or 
Era Angelico or Piero della Erancesca professes 
to like them because they tried so hard to do 
what they could not do. He sees in them, not a 
magnificent artistic success in expression, but a 
morally creditable failure in representation. For 
this failure, he thinks, they are to be excused 
because they were born so early. But the Post- 
Impressionists are not to be excused for a like 
failure, which must be mere affectation or incom- 
petence in them since they were born so late. We 
have not this view of Chaucer, though Dryden 
had it. We know that Chaucer was a master of 
poetry and that his means were perfectly fitted to 
express the emotional experience of his age. When 
Dryden rewrote the 'Knight's Tale' he proved 
that he could not do better what Chaucer tried to 
do ; and also that Chaucer had not tried to do 
what he, Dryden, could do so well, but something 
quite different which Dryden did not understand. 
So it was with the great Italian primitives. They 
also expressed the emotional experience of then- 
time with splendid success, and Titian could not 
have repainted their pictures and made them 
better. Understand this and you will see that the 

The T^ost-Impressionists 

Post-Impressionists have a right to express the 
emotional experience of their time in an art which 
is quite different from the art of Titian. The 
only question is whether they have expressed it. 

Now the emotional experience of our time, as it 
is expressed in literature and art, is not rich or full 
or confident or joyous. The artist nowadays, 
partly because he is bewildered by the multitude 
of new ideas and the increase of new knowledge, 
partly because he is not at ease in our modern 
society, suffers from a great insecurity of emotion. 
Intellectual scepticism and exasperation produce 
in him emotional scepticism and exasperation. 
In a painter this state of mind is very unfavour- 
able to fulness of representation. The sincere 
artist finds himself hating almost as many things 
as he loves for their emotional associations, 
and he finds that many things in the mechanical 
bustle of modern life have no emotional association 
for him whatever. Thus even the finest art of 
our time is inferior in richness, in serenity, and in 
accomplishment to the finest art of the past. But 
it has at least this merit, without which art is only 
a shadow of itself, that it does express the artist's 
own emotional experience of life. 

Cezanne, Gauguin and Van Gogh were men of 
very different minds ; but they were alike in this, 
that they all attempted to subordinate representa- 
tion to expression, and were all determined to 
express only their own emotional experience. 
Cezanne, a friend of the Impressionists and of 
Zola, could not content himself with impressionist 
triumphs of representation. Above all, he re- 
volted from the Impressionist insistence on the 
momentary aspects of reality. He was, so to 
speak, a kind of Plato among the artists of his 
time, believing that in reality there is a permanent 
order, a design which reveals itself to the eye and 
mind of the artist, and which it is his business to 
expose in his work. But this design he was 
determined to discover in reality itself, not in the 
works of other artists. His task was enormously 
diflicult because he would take nothing whatever 
at second hand. Nature must tell him all her own 
secrets, and he would not listen even to her when 
she told him commonplaces. He was not inter- 
ested, so to speak, in her caprices, in her chance 
effects of beauty that anyone can see. He painted 
landscape as Titian or Rembrandt painted por- 
traits ; searching always for the permanent 
character of the place, for that which, independent 
of weather or time, distinguished it from other 
places. This permanent element he found in 
structure and mass ; but, like Titian and Rem- 
brandt, he would not abstract these from colour. 
Eor him, as for these masters, structure and mass 
revealed themselves in colour, and all three must 
be verified by incessant observation. He felt 
that there was a proper colour belonging to every 
representation of structure and mass, with the 


The T^ost-Impressiorihts 

same kind of permanence based upon its relation to 
the permanent cliaracler of the scene represented ; 
and in his pictures we can see tlie result of these 
convictions. There is no brilliant illusion in them, 
nor is there any sacrifice of colour to form. They 
do not represent some ideal st.ite of being which 
he desires, nor do they express lyrically some 
passing emotion of his mind. He is a classical 
painter by nature and not because he admires the 
classics. Without help from the past he tries, by a 
classical balance of representation, to express his 
own permanent relation to reality by insisting 
upon its permanent elements. In his landscapes, 
although the colour has an independent force and 
freshness like the colour of the Impressionists, yet it 
never confuses the design, and that is always based 
upon structure and mass. He represents a world 
in which heavy things have not lost their weight, 
for that seems to hmi an essential part of their 
character. For him, a hill is not a screen for the 
play of light ; it is built up of earth and rocks. 
Nor is a tree a mere rippling surface, but a living 
thing with the structure of its growth. Everywhere 
he looks for character ; yet he subordinates the 
character of details to the character of the whole. 
And the character of the whole means for him 
its permanent character, which he expresses in a 
design not imposed upon it but discovered in it, 
as Michelangelo discovered the statue in the block 
of marble. It is the perfect balance of Cezanne's 
art that makes it difficult. At first sight he seems 
a clumsy painter, because he neither produces a 
vivid illusion nor insists eagerly upon his design. 
You might think from the character of his exe- 
cution that he had no grip of form. The fact is 
that he does not need to grip form with his paint, 
his mind has so firm a grasp of it. The design of 
his pictures is like a conviction that a man holds so 
surely and deeply that he does not state it but 
only reveals it in his conduct ; and it is a design 
based upon all the elements of reality. Sometimes, 
as in the portrait of his wife, he is so intent upon 
the revelation of character that he forgets all 
about illusion. You may say that that portrait is 
not like a woman ; but it conveys to you through 
the eye Cezanne's idea of his wife ; and it is the 
idea of a profound and noble mind. What more 
can you ask except beauty? And you will find 
beauty in it when once you have allowed the pic- 
ture to express itself to you, when you have ceased 
to demand of it an illusion which you do not 
demand of the great Primitives. 

Van Gogh is a more lyrical artist than Cezanne ; 
and in many of his pictures, he expresses the 
immediate mood with which a particular scene 
inspired him. But this is a very different thing 
from merely representing the momentary aspect 
of a scene. He went mad, and that is enough in 
the opinion of some critics to condemn his art, 
and indeed all the art of the Post-Impressionists. 


They were all mad, no doubt, but only Van Gogh 
had the honesty to betray his madness. This he 
sometimes does even in his pictures. There are 
signs of madness, for instance, in his Cornfield 
ivitli Blackbirds. The very forms of things seem 
distorted by the trouble of his mind ; yet there is a 
firm grasp of fact behind this distortion. The 
picture is evidently inspired by reality. It does 
not tell us only that the painter is mad, but speaks 
rather of an effort to express something beyond 
his madness; and the fierceness of that effort gives 
it the tragic beauty of conflict. But in most of 
Van Gogh's pictures we see not madness, but only 
an extreme sensibility controlled by a sincerity no 
less rational. 

Lyrical artists are always apt to grow impatient 
of reality unless they have a sincerity which 
makes them test all their emotions by the precise 
expression of them. Van Gogh, filled with the 
desire for precise expression, drew all his inspira- 
tion from reality. He was like a poet who 
makes music of his own experience. He used 
the impressionist technique, but in his hands it 
was never a mechanism. Compare, for instance, 
his landscape Arks with the landscapes of Signac 
and Cross and you will see at once the difference 
between poetic and photographic design, between 
an imitative and an expressive handling of 
nature. The execution with Van Gogh is a 
means of giving unity to the picture, the 
unity of his own mood ; with the other two it 
is a means of producing illusion. And Van Gogh 
always fits his execution to his theme, usually 
with perfect success. In his finest works, such as 
the Evening Lnndscaf>c and the Rain, the expres- 
sion is so keen that it produces the effect of 
illusion, the more surely because the artist has 
not aimed at that effect. We believe in the world 
which he shows us because he convinces us that 
it is a world of his own experience and not 
merely one that he has glanced at. He paints 
the essence and character of rain, as a poet might 
describe them, with all irrelevant facts eliminated 
and with an expressive power in his execution 
which, like the rhythm and music of a poet's words, 
communicates some of his own sensibility to 
us, so that his representation means to us what the 
reality meant to him. In fact no modern pictures 
are so near to poetry as V^an Gogh's ; and yet he is 
never literary or sentimental. There is no need 
of words to explain what he means, and he never 
tries to make beauty by the imitation of beautiful 
things. Even when he paints flowers he does not, 
like nearly all other painters, try to imitate their 
beauty. His pictures of sunflowers are like 
Rembrandt's portraits of men and women. He 
shows us living things and not mere instruments 
of pleasure, and they have in them the mystery of 
life, not the material attraction of prettiness. In 
fact their beauty is the expressive beauty of art 

rather than the imitated beauty of nature. This 
kind of beauty is difficult to recognise when 
it is new and originaL There is some excuse for 
critics who fail to see it, but none for those who 
call Van Gogh a mere incompetent. A glance at 
his drawings will prove that he was not that ; and 
if he went mad, so did Cowper, who remained the 
most moving of poets in his madness. 

Gauguin is a painter much easier to enjoy than 
Cezanne or Van Gogh; indeed his weakness is 
that he is too much afraid of dulness or 
irrelevance. There seem to be no accidental 
beauties in his pictures, Everything is aimed at 
and achieved with a French lucidity. And yet he 
is a great artist because he creates a world of his 
own. Most of us have never been to Tahiti, yet 
we seem to know it from his pictures as we know 
Russia from the great Russian novehsts. He does 
not paint local colour for us, but life itself, making 
it seem not strange, but familiar. He again makes 
no literary appeal whatever, yet his Esprit Vcille, 
his Esprit da Mai and his Religiensc interest like 
a story, and in each case all the story is in the 
picture. If there were more effort at illusion 

The Post-Impressionists 

there would be irrelevance, like the irrelevance of 
elaborate scenery in a play. Those who think that 
Gauguin leaves out what he cannot represent 
should notice the expressive power of what he 
does represent, his command of gesture and 
especially his indication, so rare in pictures, of the 
psychological relation between his figures. He is 
so amusing a painter that it is easy to overlook the 
nobility of his forms and to forget tiiat he, hke 
Van Gogh, is a poet. He condescends to be witty, 
but it is a condescension for which we should be 

Of the other Post-Impressionists, some, perhaps, 
have mistaken theirvocation,but none try to conceal 
their want of artistic power with irrelevant skill. 
They never tell us a multitude of things that we 
do not want to know. If they have nothing to 
say, at least they say it briefly, and often they 
have more to say and say it with more precision 
than we should suppose at a first glance. Some of 
their pictures have been called insults to the 
British public ; but that public seems to find 
them amusing, and after all it is better to be 
amused than to be bored. 


HE establishment of the Lon- 
don house of Gillow appears 
to date from about 1760, and 
in the Lancaster books of this 
year the new enterprise is re- 
ferred to as the 'Adventure to 
London.' When we consider 

the state of the metropolis at 

this period, and the slowness and difficulty of 
transport to and from the provinces, the under- 
taking must have been an 'adventure' indeed. A 
journey at this date from Devonshire to London 
occupied the time of a present day expedition to 
the Balkans, and was far more dangerous. It is 
true that the highwaymen who infested even the 
streets of London until the end of the reign of 
Anne, and were daring enough to plot to stop 
the Queen's coach as she returned from supper in 
the City, had been thinned in numbers and 
diminished in daring by numerous executions at 
Tyburn. The new police, who had superseded the 
old-fashioned watchmen of the lamp and rattle, 
had also justified their existence by holding mid- 
night marauders in check, but it still behoved the 
belated traveller who entered London by Slough 
and Hounslow to be well armed and escorted. 
The streets of London in 1760 were still in 

partial or total darkness, 
was really approaching. 

' But the age of lamps 
The City, as we see, 

1 For tlie previous article see Vol. xvii, p. 348 (Septem- 
ber, 1910). 

became vigorous in lighting, when it was found 
that severity did little against the thieves ; and the 
Westminster Paving and Lighting Act was passed 
in 1762. Then came the glories of the old lamp- 
lighters; the progress through each district to 
triin the wicks in the morning — and the terrible 
scurr}', with ladder driven against your breast, and 
oil showered upon your head, as twilight 
approached. What a twinkling there was then 
through all the streets ! But we were proud of 
our lamps ; and Beckmann, in his history of 
inventions has described them as something like 
a wonder of the world.' - 

The first 'adventure' of the Lancaster firm of 
Gillow appears to have been made to a warehouse 
near the Custom House, the only means of trans- 
port which was commercially possible at this date 
being by sea from Lancaster. Shortly afterwards, 
however, Gillow and Barton — as the London firm 
was then styled — acquired the lease of certain land 
on the north side of Oxford Street, close to 
Tyburn, now known as the Marble Arch. Mary- 
lebone was a village on the out-skirts of London 
at this date, bounded on the south by the Tyburn 
Road, the present day Oxford Street. From New- 
gate Prison via Holborn along the Tyburn Road 
was the Via Dolorosa, where many of the well- 
known malefactors of the last quarter of the 
eighteenth century, including the famous ' Six- 
teen-string Jack,' wended their way in the last 

-Knight's ' London,' edition 1S42. 


The Furniture of the Gillow Qost- Books 

procession to tlic fatal tree at the entl of wliat is 
now tlie Bayswater Road. These ' pageants' must 
liave passed, in tlieir course, the new premises of 

With the establishment of the London iiouse 
it would be imagined that Gillows forthwith 
entered the arena of fashionable furniture making. 
The actual factories of the firm, however, were 
still at Lancaster, and although at this period 
Thomas Chippendale was at the height of his fame, 
and the more effeminate style of Heppelwhile was 
just coming into fashion, there is little or no 
evidence, in the illustrated cost-books of the firm 
at this date, to show that Gillows had already 
entered the stream and followed tlie tide. They 
appear to have relied on well-selected wood and 
fine workmanship, rather than on striking origin- 
ality in design, and although there is some 
evidence at a later date to show that Gillows were 
affected by the various styles of the great London 
craftsmen, they were content at first to occupy a 
place apart from the fashionable world, while 
Chippendale and Heppehvhite were engaged under 
the supervision of Robert Adam, at Osterlcy, 
Nostell, Stourhead and Harewood. 

At the present day, when it is customary to 
characterize, forthwith, any examples of eighteenth 
century cabinet-work as Chippendale, Heppehvhite 
or Sheraton, it is interesting to examine the entries 
in these old cost-books, particularly those towards 
the very close of the century, where the rough 
sketches frequently depict pieces of fashionable 
form, in some instances strongly resembling certain 
examples which have recently figured in the well- 
known auction-rooms of London. It is Iiardly 
necessary to point out here that the degree of 
omniscience which could differentiate between 
actual work by Chippendale made about 1760 and 
a copy by Gillow of 1795 to iSoo is not possessed 
by any expert on the subject of antique furniture 
at the present day. 

In the illustrations accompanying this article 
is shown the well known Carlton House table as 
made by Gillows, and illustrated in the cost-book 
for 1796 [Plate I, a]. Below this [Figure r.] 
is the reproduction of a photograph from the 
model of Sheraton as shown in the ' Cabinet 
Dictionary' of 1802-3. The pattern is usually 
regarded as the exclusive creation of Thomas 
Sheraton, and to have been especially designed by 
him for Carlton House, when that residence was 
re-decorated and re-furnished under the superinten- 
dence of the architect, Henry Holland. From the 
Gillows' custom of following the London fashions 
at a respectful distance of from ten to twenty 
years — a fact abundantly manifested in the 
pages of these old cost-books — we are justified 
in assuming that the Carlton table was no 
novelty in 1796, since not only the design but 
also the name is referred to as a well-known 

type at this dale. From the fact that the illuslr.ilion 
is indicated as for ' Gillows, I^ondon, for Sale,' it is 
possible that the design was furnished from the 
London house, and its original author was more 
probably Heppehvhite rather than Sheraton. 
It was certainly a well-known design in 1800, as 
several variations were given in other books 
published about this date, including the original 
' Cabinet Makers' London Book i)f Prices.' 

In the entry of 1796 the cost of this interesting 
piece is given as follows : — 

1796. 25 ft. of 5 mahogany, fitie vciii'd ven'' s.itin £ s. d. 
J line 7. and rosewood, b.inds and strings... 2S. 6d. 326 
2 ft. of I in. mahogany birching, ven'' on 
one side and pl.iin van'* on the other, 
bands and strings ... ... ... 3s. 060 

5 ft. of I in. mahogany and van' bands and 
strings ...2s. 6d. o 12 6 

5 ft. of 2 in. deal and mahogany ven' is. 6d. 076 
4i ft. of I in. mahogany in the legs, and 

strings ... .. is.4d. 060 

20 ft. of i mahogany 4d. o G 8 

iS ft. of i mahogany 6d. 090 

20 ft. of I in. mahogany lod. o i5 8 

20ft. ofjoak 3d. 050 

12 ft. ofjoalc _ ... 4d. 040 

gft. ofjdeal 2d. 016 

7 ft. of green cloth lod. o 5 10 

6 large square handles gd. 046 

6 smaller do. do S^d. 029 

15 locks and ivory csciitclieons o 19 o 

2 p.iir of ij hinges 4jd. 009 

2 pair of I in. do. 004 

4 \\ castnrs 052 

Making by Win. Beckett, Time as in Petty 

Ledger „ 810 


£17 8 8 

Compared with the extracts from former 
cost-books already given in the previous 
article, the largely increased cost of both 
wood and labour in this entry is very significant. 
Mahogany had more than doubled in price and 
labour nearly trebled in the years from 1785 to 
1796. The standard of comfort of the working 
classes had not really risen ; as wages appreciated 
so had the purchasing power of the money 
diminished in even greater ratio during the same 
period. Thorold Rogers has estimated that the 
usual provisions of the labouring classes had 
increased over 135 per cent, between 1792 and 
1795. House and land rents had appreciated in 
even a greater degree. During the period when 
England was practically a self-supporting country 
the wages of the working classes touched the 
starvation level nearer than ever before or since. 
Wages increased, of course, but by no means in 
the same ratio as the cost of the means of sub- 
sistence ; had they remained stationary the artizans 
would have starved as they worked. The time of 
the ' William Beckett' referred to in the entry is 
reckoned at 5M. per hour, a rise of nearly 150 per 
cent, as compared with the wages of fifteen years 

The'Vause knife-case' [PLATE II, li] is from 


(a) the completed table 



THE rruN-nruK hf thf gilmav ccist books — u. platl i 










The Furniture of the Gillow £ost- Books 

the September entr}' of the same year as the 
Carlton table, the prime cost being given as 
X4 i2s. s^d., of which the making accounts for 
£'i 7s. od., the carving for i8s., and 'varnish and 
varnishing' is reckoned at is. This latter affords 
some insight into the method of finishing 
mahogany at this date, the patiiie so beloved of 
collectors being left for posterity to accomplish 
with long years of waxing and friction. The 
entry has a signilicant footnote, added in 1800, to 
the effect that the price is advanced by £1 is. 3d, 
From 1799 to 1803 were the historical ' Famine 
years,' when the unskilled labour and the agri- 
cultural classes starved in the highways of wealthy 
England, and this advance of 50 per cent, on the 
cost of making an article such as this vase is a 
highly significant indication of the state of the 
labour-market at this period. 

Compared with the elaborate toilet-tables in use 
at the present day, the small enclosed dressing- 
table illustrated [PLATE II, a] seems to be a very 
primitive article of furniture, and yet this appears 


N The Burlington Magazine 
for April last, Mr. H. P. Mitchell 
suggested an ingenious explana- 
tion of the much disputed 
.'signature' Monvaerni, 'dis- 
covered ' on a French enamel 
^*2^ ^s^^^li^omQ seventy years ago by M. 
fV~V V ^Pirlirr Petit. Whether Mr. 
Mitchell's explanation be accepted or rejected, one 
thing is quite certain: he has, once for all, exploded 
the Monvaerni myth by showing that the seventh 
' letter ' in the group is not R, but 3. And, inci- 
dentally, he may have suggested to some of his 
readers the necessity of examining the evidence 
before accepting statements of fact made by even 
distinguished critics; for the French experts seem 
to have followed one another like a flock of sheep, 
and not to have troubled themselves to verify the 
' facts ' on which they based their theories. 

Mr. Mitchell's suggestion was that MON- 
VAE3NI should be read MONVA E3 NI, and 
interpreted Montbas Episcopus Nazarethi, a tribute 
of respect paid by the enameller to his suggested 
patron, John Barton [de Montbas], bishop of 
Limoges and afterwards of Nazareth. In the 
correspondence which followed I pointed out 
that, by so doing, the artist would have 
rendered his wish abortive by this impossible 
conundrum, whilst he could have done what he 
wished quite simply by the use of EPNAZ. 
I also raised two other objections : — (i)That sucii 

' For former articles and letters on this subject see Vol. xvii, 
pp. 37 -39, 51 (A-Pi-il), pp. 123-125 (May), pp. 23', 232 (July, 1910)- 

to have been the only type in use until the close 
of the eighteenth century. The note on the left 
hand side of the sketch suggests that these fitted 
tables usurped the function of the sideboard or 
the receptacle for strong waters, in the bedroom. 
In a hard drinking age, such as the later Georgian 
era, it is not surprising to find the dressing-tables 
fitted also as spirit-cabinets. In the cost of this 
table four square bottles, two decanters and two 
tumblers are reckoned, at a total of iis. 4d. The 
silvered glass of the mirror, 16 in. by 12 in., is 
priced at 9s., which shows that the former pro- 
hibitive prices of glass were still inaintained. 

The mahogany sideboard [PLATE II, c] which 
is entered on September 19th, 1797, shows that 
the influence of the schools of Heppehvhite and 
Sheraton had penetrated to Lancaster at this date. 
The piece acquires an additional interest in 
having been made for Robert Peel of Drayton 
Manor. The prime cost is given as ;^io r3S. io|d., 
the making being reckoned at £1 17s. 3d., the 
carving at £2 2S. and the varnishing at 5s. 

a use of the surname would be a monstrosity, 
contrary to all ecclesiastical usage ; and (2) that 
the bishop's name was not Montbas, or Barton de 
Montbas, but Barton pure and simple. 

The use of the surname, as suggested by Mr. 
Mitchell, is to me simply unthinkable. But it is 
only fair to say that others, well informed on such 
subjects, for whose opinions I have great respect, 
differ froin me, putting, apparenth^ no limits to 
the ignorance or stupidity of artists. After all, it 
is a matter of opinion ; one cannot prove a 
universal negative and say absolutely that no one 
could be guilty of such a monstrosity, unlikely as 
it may be." That being so, I readily acknowledge 
that I may be wrong.'- 

When, however, one comes to the bishop's name, 
one is on firmer ground — the region of hypothesis 
has been left for that of fact. If it can be shown 
that the bishop's name was not Montbas, there 
is an end of the matter, and some other explana- 
tion must be sought by those interested in the 

In reply to the objection raised by me, in the 
July number of this magazine, that the bishop's 
name was not Montbas but Barton, Mr. Mitchell, 
in the November number, cited the following 
authorities ; — (i) M. Maurice Ardant, formerly 
'archiviste de la Haute Vienne ' ; (2) the Societe 
Arch^ologique et Historique du Limousin, which 

-Mr. Mitchell made a further sujr,£;estion that the first part of 
the name as he reads it might be found in the inscription 
lENRAGES on the collar of the recumbent emperor, this being 
made to mean 'Jean Barton de.' But it is difticult to believe 
that this suggestion was made seriously. 


Monvaer?}i and A Ion t has 

piihlisliod a 'mandcmcnt de Jean Baithon (\c 
Montbas cvcqiie de Limoges'; (3) the ' Diction- 
naire de la Noblesse' of Mailhol ; and (4) the 
' Dictionnaire de la Noblesse' of Aubcit de la 
Chena^'e Desbois. 

These 'authorities' are all modern, and three 
out of the four had already been consulted by 
myself and rejected as useless for the matter in 
hand. There is absolutely nothing which even 
suggests that anv of them luul paid any attention 
to the lifteenlh century history of the Barton 
family. No one doubts that its members now call 
themselves Barthon de Montbas; at the same time 
no one who has occupied himself with historical 
research needs reminding of the common error of 
reading the present into the past. But courtesy 
requires that one should not dismiss Mr, Mitchell's 
authorities with generalities. 

As to M. Maurice Ardant, nothing need be said 
here; enough will be said a little later to, I think, 
destroy whatever confidence anyone may feel in any 
opinion of or statement, unsupported by evidence, 
made by the sometime 'archiviste de la Haute 
\'ienne.' Next as to the ' mandement ' published 
by the Limousin society, it need only be said that 
the title is modern and absolutely worthless as 
evidence of fifteenth century practice. Mailhol 
has nothing whatever to say of the early history 
of the family ; he only mentions four of its 
members who were living when he wrote at the 
end of the nineteenth-century. And, finally, the 
dictionary of Aubert de la Chenaye Desbois, if it he 
of any value at all as evidence in this connexion, 
tells against Mr. Mitchell's contention, for he places 
at the head of his list ' Bernard Barton, vicomte 
de Montbas' — this Bernard being junior to the 
bishop of Nazareth by two generations. 

Equally good modern 'authorities' can be found 
in support of the contention that the bishop's 
name was Barton and not Montbas. Another 
volume of the 'Bulletin' of the Limousin society 
contains an armorial of the bishops of Limoges 
to which Mr. Mitchell has referred. In this there 
are these entries : — ' Jean Barton . , . arche- 
veque de Nazareth' f and Guillaume Barton . . . 
transfere :i Lectoure.' ' It is only fair to add that 
on the same page as the latter of these occurs 
another — ' Jean Barton de Montbas . . . doyen 
de la cathedrale ' — which shows, as the two were 
contemporaries, that the author of the armorial 
had not fully considered this subject. To cite 
another modern ' authority ' — The compilers of a 
local liiographical dictionary '' (of which only the 
first volume was published) include in their list 
three members of the Barton family, the articles 
beginning as follows : — 

-' Bulletin,' xxi, p. 142. 

«/6., p. 143. 

'■Biographic des Hommes Illustres de I'ancienne province 
du Limousin,' par Augusta du Boys et labbe Arbellot. Tome 
prem. (Limoges, 1S54). The extracts are from pp. 52, 53, 54. 


(1) 'BARTON (Jean) de Montbas I, eveque 
de Limoges.' This was the John Barton who was 
afterwards bishop of Nazareth. 

(2) 'BARTON (Jean) de Montbas, fils de 
Pierre Barton, vicomte de Montbas.' 

(3) BARTON (Jean), comte de Montbas.' 
The difi'erence of type is decidedly significant. 

But there is no need to rely on modern writers, 
for contemporary evidence of the first order is to 
be found. In the archives of the department of 
the Basses-Pyrenees there is a document dated 
1463, which bears the seal of bishop John Barton I, 
and the legend on this seal runs as follows : — 
COPI LEMOVICENSIS."^ This suggests that 
the bishop believed his name to be John Barton, 
and that his contemporaries thought the same may 
be gathered from the inscription in Latin verse on 
his tomb in the cathedral of Limoges. There is 
no occasion to reproduce the whole of the epitaph 
here, three lines will suffice : — ' Hoc jacet in 
tumulo Johannes, episcopus, hujus/Urbis honor, 
patrire gloria, plebis amor, / Marchia quem genuit, 
Bartonis cognominatus.'' Other contemporary 
evidence is to be found in the chronicle of Peter 
Foucher,* a canon of Limoges cathedral, who was 
appointed to a post in the episcopal cnrin by 
bishop John Barton II. The following passages 
occur in his chronicle : — (i)' R. in Christo pater 
D. Joannis Bartonis [John 11] episcopus Lemo- 
vicensis ' ; (2)' Rms in Christo pater Dns yoannis 
Bartonis [John I] patruus dicti quondam 
Barthoiiis ' [John II] ; (3) ' Dnmjoanuent Bartonis 
[John I] olim episcopum Lemoviscensem qui 
cessit episcopatum Lemovicensem in favore Dni 
yoanuis Barthonis [John II] sui nepotis.' There 
cannot be much doubt as to what Canon Peter 
Foucher believed the bishop's name to be. 

Finally to show that so late as seventy years 
after the death of the bishop of Nazareth the 
family was still known by the name of Barton or 
Barthon, two extracts may be given from the 
' Role du Ban et Arriere-Ban des nobles du Haut 
Limousin en 1568'": 'No. 159, Messire Pierre 
Barthon, vicomte de Montbas. . .' and 'No. 172, 
M"* Gnillannie Barthon evesque de Lectoure a 
cause de son fief de la Chieze . . . ' 

These quotations from contemporary documents 
leave no room for doubt as to the name of the 
family ; it was Barton or Barthon. 

" Raymond, ' Sceaux des Archives du Dept. des Basses 
Pyrenees,' No. 947, at p. 300 (Pau, 1874). 

'' Biographic des Hommes Illustres ... da Limousin," p. 53. 
It is quoted from Vidrac's ' Feuille Hebdomadaire ' (1779), p. 83, 
the authority there given being Nadaud's ' Mem. I\1SS.' The 
compilers of the ' Biographic' state tliat the epitaph was still in 
existence in Nadaud's time. 

' Extracts from the ' Chronique de Pierre Foucher ' are printed 
in 'Documents historiques . . . concernant . . ., La Marche et 
Le Limousin,' publics . . . par Alfred Lerou.\, Emile Molinier, 
et Antoine Thomas (Limoges, 1885). The passages quoted are 
from torn, ii, pp. 44 and .'51. 

"'BuU-'lin de la Soc. Arch, et Hist, du Limousin,' .\li, pp. 
5t3 ss. 

Monvaerni and Montbas 

It, however, may be suggested that even so early 
as the end of the fifteenth century, the members of 
such a family would have been known by the name 
of the fief held by its head. It will be time enough to 
consider this when some contemporary evidence is 
forthcoming; and it is only necessary to remark here 
that one must never lose sight of the difference 
between an ancient family, whose family name 
was identical with that of its fief, and one ennobled 
later with a merely titular fief, the name of which 
differed from that of the family — as, for example, 
Aubusson on the one hand and Barton on the 

Before passing to another matter I will venture 
the suggestions that having regard to what is found 
on the other signed enamels'" — there are but three 
— the real signature, if signature it be, is not im- 
probably MONVAE (whatever this may mean) ; 
that the 3NI on the Petit-Didier triptych may be 
meaningless, a mere filling up of the line ; and 
that what comes after 3 may be really a badly 
formed M. 

Something must now be said of the plaque 
of the Adoration of the Magi, of which so much 
use has been made for dating purposes. Here 
I must point out that, pace Mr. Mitchell, I have 
so far carefully abstained from any expression of 
opinion as to the date of the ' Monvaerni ' enamels: 
and now I have no intention of expressing any 
opinion on technical points — those are the concern 
of the expert and beyond my competence. I shall 
confine myself strictly to matters, treated by experts 
as evidence, which relate to subjects to which I 
have given some attention. 

The plaque in question, in addition to its main 
subject, bears the portrait of a kneeling prelate 
in cope and mitre, with a pastoral staff ; St. 
John the Evangelist stands behind him, and there 
IS a shield bearing the arms of the Barton 
family, ensigned with mitre and pastoral staff. 
There can then be no doubt that the kneeling 
figure represents a prelate named John Barton, but 
there is nothing to show that he was a bishop. 
It might be any one of three prelates of the name : 
(i) John Barton, abbot of Dorat, from, at any 
rate, the year 1446 to 1457 ; and bishop of Limoges 
from 1457 to 1484, when he was translated to 
Nazareth. He died in 1497. (2) John Barton, 
bishop of Limoges from 1484 to 1510. (3) John 
Barton, commendatory abbot of St. Augustine's, 
Limoges, from 1501 to T5i5;and bishop of Lectoure 
from 1 5 13 or 15^4 to 1544. That is to say, so far 
as the documentary evidence of the plaque goes 
it may represent any one of three prelates whose 
right to mitre and staff extended jointly over a 
period of eighty-seven years — from 1457 to 1544 — 

'"See 'Union Centrale des Beaux-.\rts — Exposition de 1865 
Musee Retrospectif,' No. 2,390, at p. 203 .(^^^ris, 1867), and 
' Musee National du Louvre. Notice des Emaux par Alfred 
Darcel,' p. 98 (Paris, 1891). 

or if the abbot of Dorat was mitred, one of not 
less than ninety-eight years. 

But if the plaque could be shown to refer to 
John Barton I, it could hardly have been made 
after 1484, the year of his translation to Nazareth. 
He was bishop of Nazareth, a see suffragan to 
Caesarea ; but there was likewise an archiepiscopal 
see of Nazareth, whose archbishop, having a 
small and scattered diocese in southern Italy, 
resided at Barletta. John Barton's contemporaries 
believed him to have been translated to the 
archiepiscopal see, as is evident from his epitaph 
and from Foucher's chronicle — documents which 
I had not seen when I wrote my first letter. That 
being so, one can hardly believe that an artist who 
wished to do him honour would have failed to give 
him an archiepiscopal cross instead of, or in addition 
to, a crozier. M. Bourdery, indeed, remarked the 
absence of the cross, but was of opinion that ' de 
cette omission de detail on ne pent pas conclure 
au rejet de notre interpetation ' — to which we are 
coming — ' qui est,' he continues, ' gen^ralement 

The French experts have decided that the 
prelate is John Barton I, and that the plaque was 
made after his translation to Nazareth. Fortu- 
nately they give their reasons. M. Maurice Ardant 
the sometime 'archiviste de la Haute Vienne,' 
comes first. He writes : — 

L'emailleur . . . fait presenter et recommander saint 
Jean son patron a I'enfant Jesus et a sa mere, Tarchevcque de 
Nazareth dans un des lieux les plus celebres de son nouveau 
diocese, Bethleem.'-'- 

This idea is adopted and developed by M. Louis 
Bourdery, who adopts the passage just quoted, 
and continues : — 

Cette interpretation n'a pas toujours ete admise et on a 
pretendu que la piece pourrait etre anterieure ou posterieure. 
La piece ne doit pas etre anterieure a 1484 car il y' avait 
auparavant aucune raison de representer Jean Barttion 
au milieu des rois Mages et a Bethleem : tandis qu'apres la 
nomination de ce dernier au siege de Nazareth, la representa- 
tion de Jean Barthon dans le milieu et la scene ou il est place 
s'explique naturellement . . . Nous ne pensons pas d'autre 
part que cet email puisse etre poslerieur 4 1510 date de la niort 
du dernier eveque du nom de Jean Barthon de Montbas. , . . 
Le date de cet email se circonscrit done entre les annees 1484 
et 1510.''^ 

This is all very precise and very plausible, but 
what are the facts ? Bethlehem was not one of 
the most celebrated places in the diocese of 
Nazareth ; it was not situated in the diocese or 
even in the ecclesiastical province of Nazareth. It 
was an episcopal city ; and its bishop was an im- 
mediate suffragan of the patriarch of Jerusalem. 
This is stated distinctly by the cardinal James of 
Vitry,''' a thirteenth century prelate, who after 
having been bishop of Acre, became cardinal 
bishop of Tusculum (or Frascati) and papal legate 

"' Em.ailleurs et Emaillerie de Limoges,' p. 97 (edn. of 1855). 
'■^'Les Emaux peints,' p. 13 (Limoges, 1888). 
>3 ' Hist. Orient,' cap. 57. See also Eubel, ' Hierarchia 
Catholica," s.v. Bethlehem. 


Monvaerni and Monthas 

in tlie 1 lolv Land. From the year 1223 onwards the 
bisliops of Betlilehem resided in central France, 
at Clamccy in the Nivcrnais, wliere they exercised 
jurisdiction over an exiguous territory. They 
ranked as French bishops, and the last of them, 
at the time of the Revolution, fled to England. 
His see was actually the last to be suppressed, for 
he refused to resign at the request of Pius VII, 
when the concordat was being negotiated ; so that 
it continued to exist till his death, which, however, 
occurred not long after. Surely a Frenchman, 
an 'archiviste de la Haute Vienne,' might have 
ascertained these facts ! 

To sum the matter up in two words, what 
MM. Ardant and Bourdery have written on this 
subject is based solely on their imagination. One 
can but hope that the judgements they expressed 
on technical points rested on a surer foundation. 

P.S. — After this article was set up, my attention 
was called to an important critique of Mr. 
Mitchell's article by M. Andre Demartial, which 
appeared in ' La Revue de I'Art Chrdtien ' for 
September-October, 1910 (pp. 326-332)." 

M. Demartial'^ states that: — (i) He cannot 
agree with Mr. Mitchell's suggestion that the b of 
Montbas might have been locally softened to v, for 
the reason that in the region of the Iniigite d'oc 

" The publication of this part seems to have been much 
belated, as it was only received at the Victoria and Albert 
Museum on December 14. 

15 1 gather from his publications that M. Demartial is a local 
antiquary and an active member of La Societe archSologique 
et historique du Limousin. 

the contrary is the rule — v is hardened to b. Mr. 
Mitchell cited the Taylorian lecturer at Oxford : 
M. Demartial's opinion is endorsed by a professor 
at Pari-;. (2) 'Episcopus Nazarethi' is inadmissible, 
there being no authority for the use of the genitive. 
(3) There is no evidence to warrant the suggestion 
that the bishop, John Barton, was a patron of art. 
{4) He has searched the archives of the department 
of the Haute Vienne, and more especially the 
ecclesiastical documents, for the period 1460- 
1480 without once finding Montbas joined to 
Barton. (5) M. Antoine Thomas '" has proved 
not only that the bishop of Nazareth did 
not belong to 'an illustrious family of central 
France,' but that his father was born a simple 
bourgeois of Gueret. (6) M. Thomas has also 
shown that the bishop's father was not vicomte de 
Montbas, for the scignciirie of Montbas in Poitou 
was purchased by the bishop's brother, Peter, in 
1458 — the year in which John Barton was elected 
bishop of Limoges. 

Among the illustrations which accompany 
M. Demartial's contribution to this controversy 
is one of the triptych which gave rise to it," re- 
produced from ' L'Exposition retrospective de 
I'art fran9ais des origines a 1800/ by MM.Molinier 
et Frantz Marcon. 

"M. Thomas is one of the editors of the collection of docu- 
tnents already referred to as containing the extracts from 
Foucher's chronicle. 

1' For the illustration which accompanies this article I am 
indebted to Mr. H. C. Andrews, of the Victoria and Albert 
Museum, who kindly photographed for me the photographic 
reproduction in the sale catalogue of the Odiot collection. 



A FEW months ago there was for sale in London 
a fourteenth-century coffer, of which a photograph 
is here reproduced [Plate, a]. I do not know 
where it is now. It had lost its original lid, but 
enough traces remained to show that it had been 
pin-hinged. The end uprights of the front are in 
the style common in English chests of the period, 
but the carving appeared to be French in feeling. 
The other day, passing through Paris, I looked 
into the Cluny Museum, and there saw again, 
though with eyes freshly informed, the famous 
fourteenth-century chest with the row of knights 
along the front [Plate, b]. It will be seen 
that the spandril-carvings along the top are iden- 
tical with those on the London chest, and so, 
though in a different order, are the six roses in 
the upper arcading. The carving of the London 
chest is more delicate. It is tempting to attribute 
both chests to a common maker, but the London 
example can hardly be French. Besides the English 
looking uprights already referred to, the bottom 
row of arcading is the commonest feature in 
English chests of the period. It seems probable 


that what we have here is an English coffer with 
some features of the decoration copied from what 
may at the time have been a recognized French 
type. Martin Conway. 


In the present winter exhibition of the Burlington 
Fine Arts Club there is shown (from the collection 
of Mr, Max Rosenheim) a black medallion por- 
trait of Amalia de Solms, wife of Henry Frederic, 
Prince of Urange. It is one of a pair (in my own 
collection are examples of both). On the back of 
one is impressed FRED. HENRICUS D. G. PRINCEPS 

angl, amsterod, FECIT 1626. On the back of 

the other is AMALIA D. G. PRlNCEPS AURIACA etc. 
1626 and the saine signature of Osborne. In the 
catalogue, the medallion was described as ' pressed 
horn '. I pointed out that it is of whalebone. 
Now the corrected catalogue reads ' pressed horn 
or possibly whalebone'. There is no 'possibly ' 
about it. The thing is of whalebone, and not of 

I published the facts about John Osborne and 

(a) ENGLISH (?1 UlL Krtl'.MH-CKMl KV CHhbl 









his invention in my history of Spitzbergen, entitled 
'No Man's Land' (Cambridge, 1906), at page 140. 
It may be well to repeat them in a place more 
accessible to art students. 

At Amsterdam there was an English ivory- 
turner, John Osborne by name, a native of 
Worcester. In 1618 he invented a method of 
uniting, apparently by heat and pressure, thin 
piecL'S of whalebone into a black mass, which 
became so supple and soft that it could be pressed 
into any shape in a metal mould or beneath an 
engraved plate of metal, and would take the 
impression of the finest lines. The substance was 
as black as jet, and was used to ornament looking- 
glass frames, sideboards, mantelpieces, knife- 
handles, and so forth. Fine medallions like the 
pair above referred to are not uncommon. On 
regarding the backs of them the fibre of the 
whalebone can often be recognised. For this 
invention Osborne received a pension for ten years 
from the States-General because it so increased the 
use of whalebone as to double its price. The 
authority for these statements is Wassenaer (' Hist. 
Verh.,' viii, f. 8j)} 

An invention so much used must have left 
plenty of examples besides these medallions. 
Perhaps this note may lead to further investigation. 

I may add that the whalers named a bay in, 
Spitzbergen, Osborne Inlet, possibly after this 
benefactor to their trade. 

Martin Conway. 

Visitors to the baths of Royat, La Roche-Guyon, 
and other famous health resorts of the Puy-du- 
Dome district in the centre of France, will sadly 
miss the removal from the somewhat remote 
village of Aigue- Perse the famous painting of 
St. Sebastian, by Andrea Mantegna, which had for 
so long made the spot a place of pilgrimage for 
lovers of art. No such person can have failed, on 
entering the church, which has otherwise little to 
interest the visitor, and passing into the side-chapel 
behind the choir, to have been startled and over- 
whelmed with admiration at the simple majesty of 
the great Sebastian above the altar of this chapel. 
The acquisition of this great painting is one of 
capital importance for the Louvre, especially since 
it has been effected at a cost which in these days 
seems to be very greatly below the picture's market 
value. This Sebastian by Mantegna is too well 
known to need description here, but we give a 
reproduction for the benefit of our readers. The 
picture itself appears, without doubt, to have been 
brought from Italy to Aigue-Perse by its former 
seigneur, Count Gilbert Bourbon-Montpensier, 
who in 1480 was married at Mantua to Chiara, 

• [ A short notice of John Osborn, worker in pressed horn 
and whalebone, will be found in the Dictionary of National 
Biography (1S95).— Ed.] 

Notes on Various Works of Art 

daughter of Federigo Gonzaga, Marquis of Mantua, 
in whose service Mantegna was then employed. 

We must congratulate the authorities of the 
Louvre on their splendid acquisition. If senti- 
ment compels us to regret the removal of the 
picture from Aigue-Perse, we can rejoice most 
cordially that the power of the purse has not 
succeeded in removing it from France. L. C. 

It was a happy thought to collect together at the 
Burlington Fine Arts Club a selection of paintings 
by the three brothers Le Nain, and art students 
owe much thereby to the labours of Mr. Herbert 
Cook and Mr. R. C. Witt. The history of these 
three brothers is a mysterious episode, and it 
must be confessed that at the moment the riddle 
still remains unsolved, although the present 
exhibition will without doubt prove a starting- 
point towards ultimate elucidation. All that is 
known of the brothers is set forth by Mr. Cook in 
his preface to the catalogue. They were sons of a 
sergeant at Laon in N. E. France, Antoine, born 
1588, Louis, born 1593, and Mathieu, born 1607. 
It is stated that they received instruction in paint- 
ing from a foreign artist, but nothing is known of 
them before 1629. In that year Antoine Le Nain 
was in Paris and received as master painter at S. 
Germain-des-Pres. In 1630 all three brothers were 
settled there working in the same studio, and in 
1635 Mathieu, the youngest, was received as 
master painter also. In 1648, on the foundation 
of the French Academy by Colbert, the three 
brothers ^Le Nain were admitted Academicians of 
the Second Class, like the A.R.A.s. in England 
to-day. Almost immediately, however, the two 
eldest brothers died. Mathieu survived till 1677, 
and gained honourable repute, and the rank of 
dievalier, chiefly as a portrait painter. Local 
tradition at Laon in later years spoke of Antoine 
as excelling in miniatures and small portraits, 
Louis as excelling in half-length and bust portraits, 
Mathieu in large pictures of history and other 
subjects. Curiously enough, this tradition does 
not mention the particular genre pictures with 
which the names of the brothers Le Nain are 
specially identified. 

The work of the brothers Le Nain is classified 
by Mr. R. C, Witt in three groups. To Group I 
belong as earliest in date a series of small portrait- 
groups, minutely but rather tightly painted, viva- 
cious in expression and colour, but devoid of 
pictorial unity. The second group shows a great 
advance in technical skill, but in many cases a 
similar lack of pictorial unity. On the other hand, 
the treatment of landscape and figures in the open 
air denotes a very great advance towards modernity. 
In the third group the picture increases in size, as 
do the figures ; the colours, so remarkable in those 
works, become more accentuated, and the painting 


Notes on Various JForks of Art 

I'ciiei-.illv >lio\vs a more experienced, if less creative 
hand aiid give much more impression of bemg 
(he work of a single mind. The portraits to which 
the Laon tradition alludes are unluckily not well 
represented in this exhibition. A collection of 
photographs of portraits attributed to Lc Nam 
contains certain portraits which cannot have been 
executed much later than 1625-1630, and others 
which can hardlv have been painted before 1650. 
If the ascriptions are genuine, these portraits afford 
some elucidation of the respective shares of the 
three brothers in such work. 

The French scliool of painting at the close of 
the sixteenth century was perishing from a surfeit 
of the decadent Renaissance. Such truth and 
beauty as had originally been drawn from the 
great springs of Itatian art had been falsified and 
grotesquely transmuted by the follies and extrava- 
gancies of fashion and the conceit of second- or 
even third-rate artists. Portrait painting and 
drawing, which had seen such glorious exponents 
in ]ean and Francois Clouet and their pupils, 
had degenerated into senseless display, and, 
as in England, was chiefly maintained by 
artists from the Netherlands, A new era was 
dawning, a new sun had risen on the Italian 
horizon, a new Michelangelo held the day, and 
for a time the power of Michelangelo Buonar- 
roti and Raffaello was as nothing to that of 
Michelangelo da Caravaggio, the great pamter of 
chiaroscuro. Rome once more asserted itself as 
the shrine of the prophet to which artists of all 
countries flocked for inspiration. The teaching 
and example of Caravaggio led to those surprising 
ventures in the study of light, both within the 
studio and in the open air, which produced such 
splendid results in Holland, and eventually 
brought about a kind of revolution in painting, as 
in the case of the so-called Impressionists in our 
own days. A number of young French artists 
found their way to Rome at this date— Jean de 
Boullongne, better known as Le Valentin and a 
disciple of Caravaggio, Jacques Callot and Claude 
Gellee, the Lorrainers, all three of these of about 
the same age as the two elder brothers Le Nam, 
It should be noted that of the great artists of the 
seventeenth century, only two, Frans Hals and 
Hendrik G. Pot, were senior in age to Antome Le 
Nain, and that neither of these two Dutch artists 
had made a sign before the brothers Le Nam 
attained maturity. Again, Pieter Van Laer, d 
Baniboccio, to whose works the earlier works of 
Le Nain show some resemblance, was two years 
junior to Antoine, Jan Miel, eleven, J. M. Molenaer, 
twelve or thirteen, J. van Craesbeck, thirteen, while 
David Teniers was born three years and Murillo 
thirteen years after the birth of the youngest 
brother, Mathieu, 

It is necessary, therefore, to reconstruct the early 
career of the brothers Le Nain, on conjectural lines, 


such as the following. The two elder brothers, 
Antoine and Louis, after some instruction at Laon, 
went with other artists to Rome, and worked in 
the school of Caravaggio, then living. Possibly 
Antoine remained in France, or returned there 
earlier, but Louis, who obtained the sobriquet 
' Le Romain,' continued to work in Italy alongside 
of Pieter Van Laer, and developing the same skill in 
bambocciate and in paintings executed en plc'ni air, 
as was shown later by Jan Miel and Karcl Dujardin, 
During this time Antoine may have maintained 
himself in Paris by painting portraits, such as the 
portrait of Montmorency in the Louvre. On the 
youngest brother growing up, the second brother, 
Louis, returned to France, and the three brothers 
set up a joint studio in Paris, each contributing to 
the pictures according to their own individual 
degrees of skill. At no time did any of the three 
brothers show great powers of invention as artists, 
and their figures, accessories, and the like were 
often deliberately borrowed from their contempo- 
raries or from themselves. Their studio was a 
workshop, and a picture which was popular was 
easily repeated. Hence the reminiscences of 
other painters in their works, which grew in 
predominant importance during the remaining 
years of the surviving brother, Mathieu, until the 
result became tedious and uninspired, and quite 
overshadowed by the superior skill and brilliant 
technique of painters like Brouwer and Teniers. 

On such lines it would be possible to explain the 
existence of this studio of artists, so remarkable 
for their technical skill in paint and colour, the 
precursors, and not the mere imitators, of the great 
Dutch school of the seventeenth century. For 
such reasons also an exhibition of their collective 
work is somewhat uninspiring, seeing that their 
output is pure studio-work, more of a nature to 
be put in a shop-window to attract the passer-by 
than to be regarded as a genuine artistic inspiration. 
Such a view should not, however, detract from 
the value of their work, and the interest of the 
position which they occupy in the history of 
painting. L. C, 

It is not many months since there came into our 
hands a volume* containing an illustrated history 
of the royal palace at Cintra, in Portugal, the 
history written by the Count de Sabugoza, one of 
the highest officials of the Court in Lisbon, and 
illustrated by drawings from the hand of no less a 
personage than Her Majesty Queen Amelia herself. 
It had been well known that the late King Carlos 
was an accomplished artist, above the average of 
amateurs, but it was less widely known that Queen 
Amelia possessed similar powers. The book, which 

iO. Pa?o de Cintra. Desenhos de S.Ma. Ra.S. Dona 
Amelia. Apostamentos Historicos e Archeologicos do Conde de 
Sabugosa.' Lisbon ; Imp, N.ic. 1903. 

Notes on Various Works of Art 

is due to the joint efforts of Her Majesty and Count 
de Sabugoza, contains not only a deeply interesting 
history of the palace itself, with its various build- 
ings and adornments of so many different dates, 
but also a valuable record of Portuguese art, as 
fostered and practised under the rule of the House 
of Braganza, which gave a queen to this country. 
It had been our intention to write a detailed 
criticism of certain questions relating to Portu- 
guese art in painting, sculpture, mural decorations, 
and especially the glazed tiles, which are a con- 
spicuous feature in the adornment of this palace 
and other houses in Portugal. Sorrow and 
disaster have, however, overtaken the authors of 
this book. The queen and her son, King Manoel, 
have been driven by cruel fate from their beautiful 
palace, and their exile in England is shared by the 
author of the book before us. In these circum- 
stances we feel that to expatiate on the treasures 
of Cintra, so many of which are depicted by 
Queen Amelia herself, would be to add a new 
sorrow to that of exile. We must be content with 
commending the book to all who may visit Por- 
tugal, with respectful sympathy for its authors, and 
a hope that, whatever may be the fate of this royal 
palace, the value of its history will be recognized, 
its treasures carefully preserved, and the part 
played by the royal house of Braganza, as its 
inmates up to the present day, duly remembered 
and appreciated. 


In the registers {lihri) of the old Accademia di 
Pittura in Venice there is a very interesting entry 
relating to one of its sittings when Guardi was 
present, of which the following is a translation : — 

'On December the 6th, 1789, a certain Giuseppe 
Odello having presented himself to the Accademia 
di pittura, scultura e architettura with two archi- 
tectural views showing the Square of SS. Giov. e 
Paolo and the Dogana da Mar with the Church 
of S. Maria della Salute respectively, the members 
of the Accademia convened by special invitation, 
that is, Giuseppe Diziani (President), Giacomo 
Guarana (Councillor), Francesco Maggiotto, 
Francesco de Guardi [the name is not italicised in 
the original entry], Agostino Colonna, professor 
of perspective and architect, expressed the opinion 
that the said pictures were certainly not, as was 
pretended, painted by Antonio Canale, but works 
of the School of Michele Marieschi.' 

Passing over the jury's insinuation that Michele 
Marieschi had a school, which will be new to the 
student (it means probably no more than that he 
had imitators who copied his pictures and not that 
he had distinguished pupils), I wish here to lay 
stress upon the inclusion of Guardi amongst the 
Academicians who sat in conclave to pronounce 

upon the claims of two reputed works of Antonio 

If we had no other document at our disposal 
than the above minute of the proceedings of the 
Accademia, for which we are indebted to the re- 
search of the learned Sig. Gino Fogolari,^ we 
should know one new incident in Guardi's life, 
which had hitherto not been recorded, namely, 
that in his old age the painter joined the Acca- 
demia di pittura over which his illustrious brother- 
in-law, Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, had presided in 
1755. But we have confirmation of it, and one 
further particular concerning his election has 
come to light, that is, its exact date, which another 
authority- informs us was the 12th of September, 
1784. It was customary for a new Academician 
to present a diploma work on election, but it 
appears that Guardi's went astray, though Sig. 
Angelo Conti, the compiler of the 'Catalogo 
delle Regie Gallerie di Venezia ' (1895), describes 
an architectural study (No. .163) under the name 
of Guardi (its real author is Canale as stated in 
the most recent catalogue) and mentions the 
Accademia di Pittura as its provenance. 

George A. Simonson. 


The shield : Quarterly, azure three fleurs-de-Iys or 
within a bordure dentele or and gules ; and azure 
an eagle displayed argent, are the arms of Este of 
Ferrara, as augmented by Charles VII of France 
in 1431. 

The individual is identified by the crest, a 
blindfolded and sejant lynx, and by the conjoined 
initials ni and e, as the Marquis Leonello d'Este, 
Lord of Ferrara, Modena, etc., upon medals of 
whom the lynx with bandaged eyes, seated upon 
a cushion, is represented as a device. 

The initials are, doubtless, for ;H[archio] 
e[stensis], to which dignity Leonello succeeded 
on the death of his father, Niccolo III, in 1441, 
and which he held until his death in 1450. Upon 
certain of Marquis Niccolo's medals there are 
found the initials n[icolaus] »4archio] ^[stensis]. 

Above the crest, and in allusion to it, is a motto 
which appears to be vie (?/) tout: this with all 
reserve as to the first word. 

In base is the name francisque, referring, it 
would appear, to Leonello's illegitimate son, 
Francesco d'Este (1444-71) ; this attribution is 
corroborated by the French motto or cry non plus 
courcelles, added at a later date in the top left hand 

1 See ' Bollettino d'Art' (Rome), Anno III, Fasc. VII. Sig. 
Gino Fogolari's masterly article on ' Michele Marieschi pittore 
prospettico Veneziano,' p. 244. 

2 See ' L'Arte,' Anno XIII, Fasc. IV (1910). Sig. Aide Rava's 
article on ' Lodovico Gallina ritratlista Veneziano,' in which he 
writes : ' II 12 Settembre 1784 (Lodovico Gallina) fu eletlo afar 
parte dell' Accademia di pittura lo siesso giorno che Francesco 
Guardi riportanndo nove voti favorevoli e due soli contrari," 

Notes on Various JVorks of Art 

corner. Upon tlio death, in 1471, of Borso, 
Leonello's eldest brother and his successor as 
first duke of Ferrara and Modena, Francesco is 
stated (Litta II) to have returned from Burgundy 
where lie had settled, to assist his own brother 
Niccolo in an abortive attempt to secure Ferrara, 
after which he again retired to that province, and 
nothing more is known of him. Although it does 
not appear that the Courcelles of Burgundy used 
the motto here inscribed, they certainly used the 
crv CoiiircUes! The painting may therefore have 
been taken by Francesco d'Este to Burgundy, 
becoming subsequently the property of the 
Courcelles, by one of whom the inscription in 
question was added, the identification of the 
subject of the picture, later still, as a sire de 

Courcelles, in spite of an absolute armorial 
discrepancy, being easily accounted for. 

To the further question suggested by strict 
armorial criticism: whether, considering the name 
Francisque to be strictly contemporary with the 
rest of the achievement, the latter may not have 
l")ccn painted upon the reverse of the picture at a 
somewhat later date, it is difficult in the absence of 
recorded armorials of Leonello's illegitimate son to 
give a precise reply. But whilst on the one hand, 
marks of illegitimacy would not be looked for in 
an Este achievement at this period and, on the 
other, the arms might refer equally to both 
Leonello's sons, the initials in and c can refer only 
to Leonello, hardly even to the claimant to Ferrara, 
his son Niccolo (d. 1476). A. VAN DE Put. 



To the Editors of The BuRLlNGTON MAGAZINE. 

Gentlemen', — In the article on Vincent van 
Gogh bv M. R. Meyer-Riefstahl in the November 
number of The BURLINGTON MAGAZINE I find the 
following lines : — 

' We would give much to know the contents of 
those other letters of his in the years he spent 
as an art dealer, but they are, I learn, lost beyond 
all possibility of recovery.' 

I beg to rectify this statement, and can reassure 
M. Meyer-Riefstahl. All the letters written by 
Vincent van Gogh to his brother Theodore — my 
first husband — are in my possession, and will 
shortly be published in Holland and Germany, 

They date from the year 1872 till a few days 
before his death in 1890, and give the most com- 
plete autobiography ever written. 

Some of these letters were published by me 
in the ' Mercure de France,' a few years after the 
painter's death, but it was impossible then to 
publish the whole. The reasons that prevented 
this no longer exist twenty years after his death. 
Therefore the publication will soon appear. 

Mr. Emile Bernard is also preparing for publica- 
tion the letters in his possession, which will 
appear in Paris. 

Yours truly, 

J. Cohen Gosschalk Bonger. 



Gentlemen, — In a recent number of The 
Burlington Magazine (Vol. xvii, pp. 300-301, 
August, 19 10) C. H. C. B. noted that a portrait of 
Bishop Wood, in the hall of Christ Church, Oxford, 
bears the signature ' Gowy pinx 1661.' The author 
of the n(jte considers this mysterious artist as an 
Englishman. I believe, however, that the Gowy 
of the Oxford portrait, and of the Hollar engravings 
quoted by the same author, is nobody else but 
the Flemish painter Gouii'i, whom D. Pedro de 
Madrazo, in his catalogue of the Prado Gallery, calls 
Jacob Peter, and of whom he records that he 
began his artistic career in Antwerp in the year 
1633, in which city he was received master in 
1637. This Gouwi signed three pictures, which 
can be seen in the Prado: (i) The Story of Hippo- 
inciies and Atalanttt ; (2) The Battle of the Titans ; 
(3) The Fall of learns. These three paintings are 
on a colossal scale and they originally came from 
the collection of Charles II — a good omen for 
my presumption. According to Senor Madrazo, 
the original sketches for the first two of the pictures 
belong to the Duque de Osuna. I have not been 
able to gather any more information regarding 
Gowy or Gouwi ; the Madrid pictures, however, 
present hira as a mediocre follower of Rubens. 
He must have been one of the numerous Nether- 
landish artists who during the sixteenth and seven- 
teenth centuries visited England. 
Yours faithfully, 

Morton H. Bernath. 



The Mono Collection. An appreciation by 
J, P. Richter, Ph.D. Illustrated. John 
Murray. 1910. 
Few collections of paintings formed in recent 
years in England have anything like the import- 
ance for the art historian that Dr. Mond's collec- 
tion affords ; and Dr. Richter, by whose efforts 
the collection was brought together, at Dr. Mond's 
request, is admirably fitted, both by his intimate 
knowledge of the collection and by his wide learn- 
ing, to supply a descriptive catalogue worthy of 
the collection itself. He has treated the subject 
with great fulness and enthusiasm, and the two 
handsome volumes in which he embodies his 
observations must certainly count amongst the 
best catalogues of private collections that exist. 

Without pretending always to be in agreement 
with Dr. Richter, one is impressed with the fact 
that he has tried throughout to arrive at sound 
and well-balanced conclusions. It would be only 
natural that a man who has given so many years 
of his life to seeking out and acquiring a repre- 
sentative collection of Italian art should be inclined 
to estimate the pictures he has acquired more 
highly than less interested students; but Dr. Richter 
shows himself, so far as we can find, to be free 
from bias in the matter of attributions, while he is 
careful to describe any defects of quality due to 
damage or re-painting with scientific accuracy. 

Dr. Richter begins the book with an interesting 
introduction summarising the history of great 
private collections in Northern Europe, and he 
has taken the opportunity here to give us some 
interesting details about the past administration of 
the National Gallery, some of which are scarcely 
calculated to raise our opinion of the enlighten- 
ment of those entrusted with this public duty. 
On the other hand Dr. Richter shows that if we 
have missed many opportunities which can never 
recur, the nation has at times been well served by 
its trustees and by the specialists acting under 
them ; indeed, had he not come to this conclusion 
one may suppose that Dr. Mond would scarcely 
have left his pictures so that they would ultimately 
pass into their care. 

Dr. Richter begins with the Venetian school, 
which, in point of fact, forms the most important 
part of the collection. It begins with the interest- 
ing and rare artist, Michele Giambono, whose 
works, as he rightly says, are scarcely known in 
big public galleries. He has omitted to mention 
a little Field in the Metropolitan Museum of New 
York. Then follow the Giovanni Bellinis, one an 
early Madoiuia and Child, of which, in its present 
condition it is extremely difficult to speak, though 
one is inclined to accept an attribution which 
Dr. Richter tells us Morelli subscribed to ; more- 
over the Child's face is of extraordinary beauty 
and has an expression that seems peculiarly 
characteristic of Bellini's art. The author is 
inclined to give it an early date ; it appears to me 

to come nearest of all to the Virgin and Child 
of the Santa Maria Del Orto. 

With regard to the Field Dr. Richter gives an 
interesting discussion on the iconography. It is a 
subject which, according to him, was unknown to 
Byzantine and Mediaeval art, and almost unknown 
in the trecento. I would suggest that its origin 
is Venetian, for besides the little Field by Giambono, 
to which I have already alluded, the figure occurs 
in pseudo-Byzantine pictures painted at Venice 
during the fourteenth century. Bellini's renderings 
are obviously conceived under the influence of 
Donatello, but the idea may have been suggested 
to Donatello himself while he was in Venetian 

With regard to the Two Salnls by Cima, Dr. 
Richter does not follow the theory hitherto adopted 
that they form the wings of the Annunciation in 
the Hermitage, his objection being the want of 
correspondence in dimensions. In this I am 
inclined to agree with him, although such want 
of correspondence between wings and central 
panel is not unknown in Cima's work. The main 
difficulty in this case is the unnaturalness of the 
architectural setting in conjunction with that of 
the Annunciation. With regard to the Two Saints 
by Crivelli, St. Faul and St. Feter, Dr. Richter 
publishes a discovery made by Mr. McNeil Rush- 
forth, viz., that they form a companion piece to 
the little St. George in Mrs. Gardner's collection 
at Boston, and he explains the aesthetically odd 
collocation of the two dissimilar compositions by 
the history of the little seaport of Porto di S. Fermo 
for which the picture was painted. 

Coming to the later Venetians there are one or 
two pictures which, though of second-rate artistic 
quality, have a certain importance for the history 
of art. This is specially the case in the emblematic 
figure of Justice of Giuseppe Porta, an artist whose 
activity and reputation have been almost com- 
pletely overlooked ; it will be of real value, there- 
fore, to have an indubitable and standard work by 
this artist for comparison, in a public gallery. The 
whole question of the pictures which are grouped 
around the name of Paolo Veronese will no 
doubt be one day clearly elucidated and it may be 
that many of Dr. Richter's interesting suggestions 
in his comments on Farinato and Zelolto will then 
be borne out. 

In discussing the Veronese painters Dr. Richter 
speaks with the authority of a specialist, but it is 
surprising to find him denying the influence of 
Mantegna upon Carotto, an influence which is 
evident in most works of the Veronese school, but 
surely to quite an exceptional degree in the picture 
by Carotto in the Mond Collection. 

Among the finest works of the Veronese school 
are the two exquisite panels representing SS. 
Peter and John, ascribed here to Girolamo dai 
Libri. I owe to the kindness of Prof. Gerola a 
communication of great interest with regard to 


RevieVus and Notices 

these. F^c calls attcnlioii to the fullowiiiq passaj^e 
in Vasari's life of Francesco Moroiie (under the title 
' Life of P'ra Giocondo. Sansoni V, 310 seq.). The 
whole passage describes the works undertaken by 
Francesco Morone (' amicissimo e come fratello 
di Girolamo dai Libri') in collaboration with the 
latter in the Church of Sta. Maria in Organo. 
' E dopo dipinse [sc. Francesco Morone] I'ancona 
deir altare della Muletta, facendovi un San Piero 
ed un San Giovanni, che sono poco piu d'un 
braccio d'altezza ; ma lavorati tanto bene e con 
tanta diligenza, chc paiono miniati.' 

The suggestion is that these words apply to the 
pictures in the Mond collection, and this might 
hold even if we reject Vasari's attribution to 
Morone, since, as he points out, the artists were 
working in the closest connexion, and as Dr. 
Kichter savs, their styles at this period were 
extremely similar. 

Though the Florentine school does not occupy 
so important a place in the Mond collection as 
the Venetian, it is impossible to exaggerate the 
importance of the two splendid predella pieces of 
the life of St. Zenobius, by Botticelli. These 
have been already described at great length in 
Mr. Home's monumental volume. Dr. Richter 
interprets one of the figures differently, and here 
he may be right, although Mr. Home's theory 
gives to the scene a greater dramatic completeness, 
but I find it impossible to follow Dr. Richter in 
his ascription of the work to an early period in 
the artist's career. He seems to base this almost 
entirely upon the fact that they are harder and 
clearer in outline, less atmospheric, than most of 
the master's works. But Botticelli's development 
was not like that of many contemporary artists in 
the direction of greater atmospheric envelope- 
ment ; indeed, on the whole, as far as this goes, 
he rather recedes from the position established by 
his master, Filippo Lippi. His primary feeling 
was for line, and it was in the direction of a greater 
freedom and a more certain rhythm of line that 
development took place. Certainly it seems to me 
impossible to find anything in Botticelli's early 
work at all to match this in the dryness and 
simplicity of its linear design, or in the dramatic 
intensity of the figures ; they seem to belong 
entirely to the mood which inspires his illustra- 
tions of Dante. The fact that their purpose was 
more frankly decorative than many of his pictures 
may also account for something of the peculiar 
hardness and flatness of the technique. They 
remain, however, among the most splendid 
examples of Botticelli's art, and are by themselves 
enough to confute the prevalent idea that Botticelli 
was Botticellian. 

With regard to the beautiful Madonna and Child 
usually ascribed to Ghirlandajo, Dr. Richter enun- 
ciates the rather surprising view that it is by the 
master of the An^e/ and Tobias and the Virgin and 


Child 2i'itli A ii<^i Is, in the National Gallery. That 
unknown artist and remarkable teciniician was, it 
seems to me, much more closely associated with 
Verrocchio's atelier than the picture in the Mond 
collection, of which the technical methods are 
entirely distinct. This has not the peculiar yellow 
underpainting of the Verrocchian painter, and the 
landscape is much more definitely Ghirlandajo's. 
If it be not by Ghirlandajo himself, and in this 
perhaps Dr. Richter is right, it surely might be 
attributed to his double, Mainardi. A comparison 
with the picture recently bequeathed to the National 
Gallery by Mr. Salting ought to afford a basis for 
testing this conclusion. 

The profile Portrait of a Lady gives rise, like 
many similar works to various hypotheses. Dr. 
Richter quite rightly compares it with the Poldi 
Pezzoli and the Berlin examples, but he rejects 
what appears to me, both on stylistic and technical 
grounds, to be the correct view, viz., that all three 
are the work of Piero Pollajuolo in favour of an 
unsupported theory that Matteo da Pasti was the 
author of these pictures, simply on the ground 
that the profile head has an inevitable resemblance 
to portraits on a medal. It would take too long 
to give the technical grounds on which I hold 
Piero Pollajuolo to be the author of these works, 
but I may add that Signor Cavenaghi, whose 
technical knowledge is unrivalled, has arrived at 
the same conclusion. When this portrait was 
exhibited recently at the Burlington Fine Arts 
Club, doubts were raised as to its antiquity. These 
are in my opinion entirely groundless, though they 
have this much excuse — that the background has 
been entirely cleaned away and a contour put 
round the head in order to mark it off from the 
discoloured gesso, and this contour has materially 
damaged the artistic quality of the painting. 

Among the Florentine pictures perhaps the most 
splendid masterpiece, with the exception of the 
Botticelli, is the great Adoration by Fra Barto- 
lommeo, a triumphant vindication of this now 
too-neglected genius. 

Dr. Richter is certainly to be complimented 
upon the thoroughness with which he has carried 
out this important work. If, as I think, he some- 
times fails in matters of pure style criticism, he 
possesses an equipment which is rare among the 
historians of Italian art, a deep knowledge of the 
theological aspects of iconography. This often 
enables him to throw a new light on the artist's 
mode of approaching his subject, and adds greatly 
to the interest of his descriptions. 

Dr. Richter has been ably seconded by Miss 
Cameron Taylor in the preparation of this work 
for the English-speaking public. We have only 
one criticism of the admirable way in which she 
has performed her task, namely, the use of niveau 
instead of the English equivalent ' level ' through- 
out the book. 

RevieT9s and Notices 

Catalogue of Early Italian Engravings, 
Preserved in the Department of Prints 
AND Drawings in the British Museum. 
By Arthur Mayger Hind, iB.A. Edited by 
Sidney Colvin, M.A., D. Litt. London : 
Printed by order of the Trustees, 1910. 
A catalogue of any portion of the inexhaustible 
treasures hoarded up in the British Museum, pre- 
pared by a member of the staff with the imprimaUir 
of his chief, and issued as an official publication, 
can in these days be relied upon as a solid and 
accurate piece of work, embodying all that recent 
knowledge and research can contribute to make 
the catalogue complete. Such a catalogue is 
before us now, comprising the precious collec- 
tion of Early Italian Engravings in the Print 
Room at the British Museum. Speaking in a 
paradox, Mr. Sidney Colvin, as keeper of this 
department of the nation's treasures, may be con- 
gratulated upon the tardiness of this publication. 
The extent and exceptional value of this collec- 
tion is well known to connoisseurs. Its history is 
told in a succinct and illuminating introduction by 
Mr. Sidney Colvin himself. Mr. Colvin tells us 
how in 1845, o" ^he recommendation of his pre- 
decessor, Mr. William Hookham Carpenter, the 
trustees purchased en bloc the collection of old 
prints of the Early Italian school formed by the 
printseller, William Smith, of Lisle Street, who had 
secured the bulk of everything important in this 
branch of art from the Sykes, Wilson, Young 
Ottley, Coningham, and other famous collections 
of English amateurs. 

The idea of a catalogue raisontie, such as the 
one before us, had been approved by the trustees, 
and put in hand before Mr. Colvin took over 
the keepership of the department of prints and 
drawings. The catalogue had been entrusted to 
Mr. Richard Fisher, an enthusiastic collector of 
such works of art, a man of wealth and leisure, 
very highly esteemed — and justly so — by his 
many friends in the world of art for his attain- 
ments as a critic and connoisseur. The catalogue, 
with a lengthy introduction, was already in type 
and the illustrations in photo-lithography com- 
pleted, when Mr. Colvin succeeded Mr. G. W. 
Reid as keeper of the department. The subject 
being one in which Mr. Colvin took a special 
personal interest, he was naturally anxious that 
this portion of the collections under his charge 
should be made known to the public with all 
reasonable rapidity. On looking through Mr. 
Fisher's catalogue it was, however, easily dis- 
cerned that Mr. Fisher, handicapped by age and 
to some extent by undue adherence to tradition, 
was far from being abreast of the more modern 
and generally accepted aspects of Continental 
research in such matters, and that to publish Mr. 
Fisher's catalogue as it stood would be to issue a 
work that was out of date long before the day on 

which it would be published, and would be no 
credit to its author. On Mr. Colvin's recommenda- 
tion, therefore, the catalogue was withheld from 
publication; but Mr. Fisher's introduction, a care- 
ful and useful summary of the whole subject, was 
published in 1884, and the illustrations held over 
for use at a future period. Mr. Colvin then found 
that the catalogue wanted more than revision, 
and required to be done over again from the 
beginning. It was just the delay caused by the 
resumption of so heavy a task that has had such 
beneficial results. In 1888 Mr. Colvin was lucky 
enough to obtain for the British Museum by pur- 
chase from Mr. John Ruskin a precious book of 
anonymous Florentine drawings, forming a Picture 
Chronicle of the World. A careful study of these 
drawings convinced Mr. Colvin of the close relation 
between the draughtsman and many of the early 
Florentine engravings in the British Museum Col- 
lection. The result of Mr. Colvin's researches were 
set forth in his important work, 'A Florentine 
Picture-Chronicle ... by Maso Finiguerra,' which 
appeared in 1898. In this work Mr. Colvin stated 
certain theories as to the history of engraving in 
Italy during the fifteenth century, which form the 
basis of the present catalogue. It is satisfactory, 
in the cause of British scholarship and expertise, to 
find that Mr. Colvin's theories have in the main 
held their ground and been accepted by modern 
critics and investigators, who have had the oppor- 
tunity of going over the same ground with even 
greater advantages of recent research than Mr. 
Colvin had himself. 

The further delay caused by the study of these 
drawings and the publication of Mr. Colvin's book 
was again productive of good, in that it enabled 
him to hand over the task of actually preparing 
the catalogue to Mr. A. M. Hind. Mr. Hind, whose 
reputation for careful work and original study is 
well known to readers of this Magazine, was able 
to devote his official time to the catalogue in a way 
which would have been impossible for Mr. Colvin, 
as keeper of that great department. The two 
volumes of text and illustrations just issued may 
therefore be looked upon as the joint work of Mr. 
Colvin and Mr. Hind, who may well be congratu- 
lated upon their respective shares in a work which 
must remain a, a landmark in the history of Early 
Italian Art. Another fortunate result of the delay 
in publication was that Mr. Colvin and Mr. Hind 
were able to avail themselves of the prolonged and 
important investigations on the same field by Dr. 
Paul Kristeller, with whom, however, they do not 
always find themselves in perfect agreement. Further 
advantage accrued by the help given by Mr. Herbert 
P. Home and Mr. Berenson, both as students of the 
same subject, and incidentally in their monumental 
and epoch-making writings on the early Florentine 
school in general. 

It would be impossible within the limits of these 


RevieVi's and Notices 

columns to review the whole fabric of early Italian 
engraving as set forth in the Introduction and the 
Catalogue. The relations between this school 
of engraving and the contemporary school in 
Germany are discussed, and their independence 
at tlie outset practically established. That so impor- 
tant a development in the history of art should 
have occurred simultaneously both north and 
south of the -Alps, was due, no doubt, to the general 
advance in the art of the goldsmith and the general 
improvement in the craft of paper-making, in ink 
and other pigments available for printing, and 
various other ingredients, all contributing to the 
ease with which, when once attempted, a picture 
could be printed, as well as drawn with the pen or 
brush, and a new art thus introduced into the 
world. The anonymous engravers at Florence at 
this period can be divided into two classes, one 
working in a fiwc manner including Maso Fini- 
guerra and his followers, as set forth by Mr. Colvin, 
leading to the connexion with Botticelli, and the 
other class, in a broad manner, comprising the 
famous Triumph of Petrarch ; while the engravers 
of both classes contributed to reproduce the ex- 
quisite series of Prophets and Sibyls which have 
delighted students of all countries. 

Leaving Florence, and the fascinating questions 
as to the relations of Botticelli, Pollaiuolo, Cosimo 
Rosselli, and other well-known painters with the 
engraver's art, the student is confronted with the 
famous so-called ' Tarocchi cards of Mantegna,' 
about which Mr. Colvin and Mr. Hind have origi- 
nal views of the greatest importance, and with the 
engravings by Andrea Mantegna and his pupils, 
as well as those of other artists of the North Italian 
and Venetian schools. The question of the so- 
called Tarocchi, a traditional title rejected by the 
compilers, is in itself worthy of detailed study in 
this Magazine, for it is difficult to abandon at 
command the notion that this series formed part, 
if not the whole, of a pack of figure-cards used in 
some round game. For the present we must refer 
our readers to Mr. Hind'sluminousand well-reason- 
ed exposition of the reasons for looking on these 
prints as issued for instruction rather than amuse- 

The engravings, also, by Mantegna, or after his 
designs, are a subject of enthralling interest to the 
student, who must be guided liy his trained eye 
and intelligence in forming his opinions. The sub- 
ject has been very thoroughly investigated by Dr. 
Kristeller with whom the compilers here find 
themselves in more than usual agreement. Students 
also of art at Venice and Vicenza should not fail 
to make acquaintance with the engravings by 
Mocetto, Benedetto Montagna, Giulio and Do- 
menico Campagnola and above all by Jacopo de' 
Barbari. A catalogue raisoniw is usually dry 
reading, but in this case we can congratulate Mr. 
Hind on having compiled his catalogue in a way 

which makes it readable and Instructive as a book 
in itself, a work in fact which should be on the shelf 
of every serious student of Italian art. If wc have 
any criticism to pass, it is one which applies to the 
publications issued by the Trustees of the British 
Museum as a whole, namely, that their bulk and 
their cost place them out of reach of the younger 
students, who have not yet attained to the 
opportunities, scanty and elusive in themselves, of 
sufficient pecuniary emolument to enable them to 
supply their shelves with the necessary panoply of 
action, as exemplified in these important volumes. 


Description of Chinicse Pottery and Porce- 
lain, being a translation of the T'ao Shuo 
with introduction, notes and bibliography by 
Stephen W. Bushell. Oxford : Clarendon 
Press, 1910. 14s. net. 
The posthumous publication of Dr. Bushell's 
version of the T'ao Shuo is an event of high im- 
portance. We are at last in possession of a well- 
reputed work on Chinese Ceramics translated into 
the English language and taking rank with 
Stanislas Julien's rendering of the T'ao Lu in 'La 
Ceramique Chinoise.' 

Of the two works the T'ao Lu is forty years later 
in date and of considerably wider scope, but the 
English version of the T'ao Shuo has the advantage 
of having been prepared by one who had unrivalled 
knowledge of the subject dealt with. Julien, for 
all his unquestioned superiority as a Chinese 
scholar, was heavily handicapped by unfamiliarity 
with the porcelain itself. A combined translation 
by Dr. Bushell and Stanislas Julien would have 
been ideal. 

That the present publication should be a 
posthumous one is a matter of regret and of no 
little surprise, for we read in the preface that the 
work was complete in its present form as long ago 
as 1891. 

' Nonumque prematur in annum ' was a counsel 
of perfection, and it is far from clear why this 
important book should have been held back so far 
beyond even Horace's limit. Indeed it has lost not 
a little of its freshness during this prolonged sup- 
pression, for the bulk of its most valuable matter 
has in the meanwhile been incorporated in Dr. 
Bushell's monumental work on the Walter's collec- 
tion. Oriental Ceramic Art, and some of the state- 
ments which are now published in the T'ao Shuo 
have already been discredited in Dr. Bushell's 
more recent works. However, those who have 
studied Oriental Ceramic Art will none the less 
welcome the T'ao Shuo as revealing the secret 
sources of so much of Dr. Bushell's knowledge, 
and those who have not been so fortunate will 
rejoice to explore those sources for themselves. 
But both will find that a Chinese book, however 
well translated, does not readily yield up its 


Reviews and Notices 

treasures, and they will have to delve and sift 
industriously in order to extract the desired infor- 
mation from the philological digressions and other 
more or less interesting irrelevancies in which it 
is embedded. The Chinese have not been 
altogether fortunate in their Ceramic literature. 
The bulk of it is buried in encyclopaedias, and the 
T'ao Shuo (first published in 1774) is the first 
attempt to collect all the available information in 
one book, and according to Dr. Bushell it still 
remains the most valued work on the subject in 
China. The learned author Chu Yen, known also 
as Chu T'ung-ch'uan or by his literary title Li-t'ing, 
was a scholar and antiquary whose 'whole life had 
been devoted to writing and compiling books.' A 
list of twelve of his works is given in the fourth 
preface including ' Selections from the old prose 
authors and poets of the T'ang and other dynas- 
ties,' 'Instructions on Playing the Lyre,' 'On the 
Art of Writing Verses,' and a collection of verses 
of his own composition. The T'ao Shuo is one of 
his compilations, and consists of excerpts from 
old writers and commentators, interspersed with 
notes by Chu Yen himself, which are chiefly con- 
cerned with ritual observances, etymology and 
history. When he ventures his own opinion on 
purely Ceramic questions, he is not always happy; 
and it is abundantly clear that Chu Yen was more 
deeply versed in the literature of his subject than 
in the wares themselves. He does not seem to 
have been either a collector or a connoisseur. 
Though the book was published in 1774, the 
porcelain of the present dynasty is scarcely noticed. 
Four pages of arid lists are sufficient to cover the 
K'ang-hsi, Yung-cheng and half the Ch'ien-lung 
periods. The rest of Part I is occupied by the 
important description of the Twenty Illustrations 
of the manufacture of Porcelain by the celebrated 
T'ang Ying. Part II contains a description of 
Ancient wares from fabulous times to the end of 
the Yuan dynasty. Part III deals with the Ming 
dynasty and includes a valuable description of the 
processes of manufacture during that period. 
Parts IV to VI are occupied by descriptions of 
specimens, classified for the most part according to 
their shapes. The most valuable part of these last 
divisions contains the long lists of objects made at 
the Imperial factories for the late Ming Emperors. 
The descriptions are full of interesting matter, 
but as may be imagined they are not light reading, 
and we sigh for a few good illustrations to relieve 
the strain upon our imagination. It was part of 
Dr. Bushell's original plan to give twenty-one 
illustrations, which are indeed fully described in 
the introduction, but as all of them have appeared 
since 1891 in other works, the publishers thought 
it better to withdraw them. The recent exhibition 
at the Burlington Fine Arts Club could have 
furnished excellent substitutes, but probably the 
existence of these was unknown to the publishers 

six months ago as it was to the general public 
It would be presumption on my part to offer an 
opinion on the merits of Dr. Bushell's rendering 
of the original text of the T'ao Shuo, had I not 
learned from one of our best Chinese scholars 
that the translation is an excellent one. I may, 
however, be allowed to comment on the absence 
of Chinese characters and the paucity of notes. 
Dr. Bushell in his introduction excuses the former 
on account of the difficulty of obtaining type. 
This might have been the case in 1891, but for the 
last ten years such a plea has been quite unjustifi- 
able, and the want of the original characters is 
severely felt in many difficult and doubtful 
passages where diversity of opinion is inevitable. 
Thus on page 16 Chu Yen has given a long note 
on the blue colour involving a free use of the 
ambiguous word Ch'ing which may mean blue or 
green. In speaking of the celebrated Sung wares, 
the Ju, Kuan, Ko and Lung-ch'iian porcelains, the 
word ch'ing is applied indiscriminately in the 
original, but Dr. Bushell rightly or wrongly has 
rendered it now blue, now green, in deference to 
his own views. This free translation, which is 
observable in many other passages, requires a note 
of explanation, particularly as Chu Yen goes on to 
say ' painting in blue on a white ground also 
requires the same blue material,' implying that he, 
at any rate, intended that ch'ing should mean blue 
and not green throughout. The fact that Chu 
Yen was probably mistaken makes a note all the 
more necessary. Again, such expressions as 
' dishes moulded in the form of an altha3a blossom, 
with the rim outlined like a Buddhist gong' — and 
there are many others equally obscure in the book 
— are unintelligible without explanatory notes. 

I have already hinted that Chu Yen's opinions 
are often open to doubt, and in one important 
passage he seems to have led Dr. Bushell into a 
confusion which the latter has taken pains to avoid 
in his later works. In describing * Chien porcelain ' 
among Sung wares Chu Yen states that it was 
'made at Te-hua Hsien, in the prefecture of 
Ch'iian-chou Fu, in the province of Fukien.' He 
then proceeds, in accordance with his usual 
practice, to quote a passage of eight and a half 
lines from the Ko ku yao lun which says that ' the 
bowls and cups .... are black in colour and of 
rich glaze. They have yellow rabbit's-hair marks 
and tear-drops, etc,' concluding with the surprising 
sentence, 'the images of Buddha are specially 
beautiful,' to which Dr. Bushell appends a note 
that 'this is the ivory white porcelain of collectors,' 
identifying it with the well-known blanc de Chine. 
The whole passage is so subversive of our present 
views that I referred to the Ko ku yao lun for an 
explanation, and found that nothing is stated 
there about Te-hua in this connection and that 
the last four and a half lines of Chu Yen's quota- 
tion, including the remark about the images of 


Reviews and Notices 

Buddha, are non-existent in the original. The 
explanation is simple. There are two distinct 
Chien wares, the older made at Chien-an and con- 
sisting chiefly of the black bowls with 'nihbit's 
hair' markings on the glaze described in the Ko 
ku yao lun and well known under the Japanese 
name of temmoku, and the familiar ivory-white 
porcelain of Te-hua which is distinctly stited in 
the T'.ao Lu to have been first made in the Ming 
dynasty. The Tc-hua factories are still celebrated 
for their fine figures of Buddha, Kuan Yin and 
other personalities, both sacred and secular. Chu 
Yen appears to have confused his notes on the 
two Fukien factories, and I do not think that if he 
had had practical acquaintance with the wares 
themselves it would have been possible for him to 
have done so. 

For the rest, we look eagerly but in vain for 
any fresh information on the periods previous to 
the Sung dynasty. Chu Yen does not even men- 
tion the green-glazed Han pottery of which there 
are hundreds of known examples to-day, and his 
references to the Chin, Wei, Sui, T'ang and After- 
Chu dynasties are purely literary and show no 
acquaintance with actual specimens. The mottled 
T'ang wares of which examples still exist in the 
Shoso-in, at Nara, are not named. The chief value 
of the T'ao Shuo from a ceramic point of view lies 
in its information on the Sung and Ming wares, 
but there is a mass of curious and interesting 
matter concerning subjects other than ceramic 
which gives us a pleasing insight into the thought 
and methods of a Chinese scholar. But whatever 
the practical worth of Chu Yen's book may be to 
the Western world, and it is no doubt one of the 
two best Chinese treatises on Chinese pottery and 
porcelain. Dr. Bushell's translation is a great and 
memorable achievement, and one for which every 
student of the subject will be deeply grateful. 

It should be added that in addition to the actual 
translation of the T'ao Shuo, the present book 
includes a valuable introduction by Dr. Bushell 
and an extremely useful bibliography containing no 
less than a hundred and five references to Chinese 
works used by Chu Yen in his compilation. The 
publishers do not seem to have considered an 
index necessary, but in its place they have printed 
the celebrated letters of Pere d'Entrecolles which 
are too well known already to require comment. 
The book is well printed and singularly free from 
typographical errors, and fully maintains the high 
standard of the Clarendon Press publications. 

R. L. H. 

Ceramic Literature : an Analytical Index of 
the works published in all languages on the 
History and Technology of the Ceramic Art. 
Compiled, classified and described by M. L. 
Solon. Griffin and Co. 42s. net. 

The merits and defects of such a work can only 

be established by long use ; without it no one is 
capable of criticising so wearisome a labour but 
the labourer himself, especially if he have so com- 
prehensive a knowledge of his subject as has Mr. 
Solon, He may therefore be allowed to explain 
the scope and the difficulties of his task in the 
substance of his Extended Title and his Introduc- 
tion. He first states on his title page that his 
Index further includes the catalogues of public 
museums, private collections and auction sales 
especially occupied with Ceramics, and the most 
important price-lists of ancient and modern manu- 
factories of pottery and porcelain. Basing his 
work, as he states, on that of Champfleury, Mr. 
Solon thus enumerates his own modifications and 
additions : — the completion of each section by the 
insertion of the omitted titles, and of publications 
posterior to Champfleury ; the correction of errors ; 
the addition of supplementary descriptions; the 
arrangement of entirely new sections such as 
Greek vases and terra-cotta, Roman pottery, pre- 
historic and mediaeval; finally, a clearer, more 
comprehensive classification according to subjects, 
and easy references to the descriptive passages. 
Mr. Solon is also his own advocate in exposing 
the difficulties of selecting from the vast mass of 
fugitive writings. We have before noted in these 
pages that anonymous articles in periodicals of a 
general popular character neither claim nor pos- 
sess any authority on special subjects. Applying 
this principle, we should demur to much of that 
nature included by Mr. Solon, but he disarms 
criticism by frankly submitting his selection to 
the inquirer's judgment in each case ; and we 
may presume that he has tested the value of each 
writing before he included it. It is a pity, how- 
ever, that he did not save his space and trouble by 
avoiding the futile practice of translating the titles 
of foreign works. The translated titles are ob- 
viously superfluous to inquirers who can read the 
works quoted, and useless to those who cannot. 
This is but a technical fault in a work of inestim- 
able value to all serious study of Ceramics. 

Werke der Kleinplastik in der Skulpturen- 
SAMMLUNG DES A. H. Kaiserhauses ausge- 
vviihlt und beschrieben von Julius v. Schlosser. 
II Band: Bildwerke in Holz, Wachs und 
Elfenbein. 55 Tafeln. Wien, 1910. Anton 
Schroll and Co. 

We noticed the first volume of this work in the 
July number of this magazine. The volume before 
us is of somewhat lower artistic interest than its 
predecessor ; indeed it is hard to repress a feeling 
of disappointment as we turn its finely executed 
plates. Among all the objects in wood, wax or 
ivory, there is nothing earlier than the late fifteenth 
century, and very little so early as that. As Dr. 
von Schlosser pointed out in his introduction to 


Reviews and Notices 

the first volume, the collection reflects the idiosyn- 
crasies of the period when it was chiefly made ; 
hence the Middle Ages, properly speaking, are as 
good as unrepresented. The deficiency was not 
so patent in the first volume, which contained 
some fine Italian bronzes. But it is especially 
noticealile when we come to the ivories, for the 
very word, to students familiar with other great 
collections, calls up the memory of the thirteenth 
and fourteenth centuries, not to mention the fine 
products of early Christian ivory-carvers. And 
here we are confronted with a rich and doubtless 
valuable collection of carvings of the seventeenth 
century, of the artistic value of which the less 
said the better. One piece — a Netherlandish 
Madonna and Child with St. John (PI. XXXVIII, 
3) — has something of dignity in comparison with 
the others, but it would hardly be noticed in a 
collection of ivories of the fine period. Among 
the woodcarvings, the Allegory of Mortal Change 
and Decay stands easily first. Conception and 
rendering are still Gothic. The two figures of 
youth and maid in the prime of their beauty, as a 
South German of the end of the fifteenth century 
conceived it, are full of a melancholy charm. 
But while a greater artist would have been content 
to indicate the fading of their beauty by some 
symbol, this master has lavished all his skill on the 
most gruesome figure of a hag that could well be 
conceived. The contrast is so violent that the 
allegory loses all verisimilitude, and it is difficult 
to agree with the author that the realistic details are 
throughout subordinated to the general artistic 
effect. The allegory, by the way, is incomplete, 
for the ungallant artist has shown us the effect of 
decay on the female sex only. Among the other 
woodcarvings a little head of St. John Baptist, 
attributed to Francesco da S. Agata, is noticeable 
for its fine feeling, enhanced, perhaps, by the many 
works of German origin which serve it for a foil. 
The wonderful backgammon board by Hans Kels 
is entertaining, but it must be admitted that the 
frank vulgarity of the legendary amours as he has 
depicted them is only heightened by the undoubted 
skill of the craftsman. One of the ladies, by the 
way, described as 'Antonia Justiniani imperatoris 
coniux,' is puzzling. Is there a confusion between 
Antonina the wife of Belisarius, and Theodora ? 
A hasty search through the scabrous pages of 
Procopious fails to suggest any interpretation of 
the scene on this piece. One turns with relief lo 
the highly respectable set of draughtsmen with 
portraits of royalties and great persons, in the 
manner of the same master (PI. XVIII). Among 
these the portrait of Catherine, wife of Henry VIII, 
is, to judge from the head-dress, more likely to be 
Catherine of Aragon than Catherine Howard, as 
the author suggests ; but its iconographic value 
is small. In the addenda the author notes a 
point with which Mr. Loeser has already dealt in 

the October number of this Magazine. The 
Italian bronze Mercnry published in the first 
volume is from the same hand as the Minerva 
which was published in this Magazine in October, 
1909, with the attribution to Benvenuto Cellini. 
What is more, the two figures must have belonged 
to a set. Mr. Loeser, it will be remembered, 
scouting the attribution to Cellini as doing him 
too much honour, believed the figure to be the 
work of Jacopo Sansovino. The Mercnry was 
described by Dr. von Schlosseras recalling in some 
respects Cellini, in others Sansovino. He now 
accepts Mr. Loeser's view, and regards the large 
bronze Mercnry at Stockholm as not the original, 
but a later version, of the statuette. 

These two volumes with their 109 spendidly 
executed plates and their commendably brief and 
scholarly text, afford a model which might well 
be copied by other public collections where the 
compilation of complete catalogues does not appear 
to be feasible. G. F. H, 

Aegyptische Goldschmiedearbeiten. Unter 
Mitwerkung von Georg Moller und Wilhelm 
Schubart herausgegebenvon HeinrichSchiifer. 
Berlin: Verlagvon Karl Curtius. 1910. Price 
75 marks. 
This is a sumptuous volume, the first of a series 
to be issued by the authorities of the Egyptian 
Department of the Royal Museums of Berlin, 
entitled ' Mitteilungen aus der agyptischen Samm- 
lung.' The object of the series is stated to be that 
of displaying the collections from the archaeo- 
logical and artistic point of view. In the work 
before us we find included not only a catalogue 
and handsome illustrations of the Berlin collec- 
tion of Egyptian jewellery and goldwork, but also 
treatises on the history of these ornaments and the 
manner in which they were used and worn, illus- 
trated by reproductions from Egyptian paintings 
and reliefs. In this way the monotony of even the 
best catalogues is avoided, and the book becomes 
of interest and importance not only to the archaeo- 
logist, but to the lover of art and artistic achieve- 
ment as well. Dr. Moller and Dr. Schubart have 
done their work with characteristic thoroughness, 
and have, at the same time, made the most of the 
Berlin collection, which, with the exception of the 
Ferlini treasure, is only a very moderately repre- 
sentative one. Interest naturally centres round the 
very remarkable gold ornaments the great majority 
of which were alleged by Ferlini to have been the 
treasure of a Meroitic queen, and to have been 
found by him in one of the pyramids at Meroe, 
near the modern village of Kabushia, in the Sudan. 
Ferlini himself was an Italian doctor attached to 
the Egyptian army in the time of Muhammed Ali, 
and appears to have been something of an ad- 
venturer. In any case, in 1834, while in the 


Reviews a fid Notices 

Sudan, he made a fine collection of gold orna- 
ments and jewellery, in the quest of which he 
attacked some of the pyramids with disgraceful 
vandalism. His own narrative states with much 
circumstantial evidence that his great 'haul' was 
from one particular pyramid at Meroe, hut there is 
every reason to doubt his statement. This dt)ubt, 
in spite of the sceptical attitude adopted by certain 
authorities, does not extend to the objects them- 
selves, whicli are certainly genuine. Dr. Schilfer, 
in his interesting account of the history of the 
Ferlini jewellery, admits, what Lepsius long ago 
thought, that Ferlini's statements are not reliable, 
and that the objects came from various parts of 
the Sudan. Although the majority of Ferlini's 
gold ornaments bear a close relation to those 
depicted on the walls of the Meroitic temples as 
worn by royal personages, Dr. Schafer appears to 
have overlooked the fact that at least two scarabs, 
said to belong to the same treasure, and impressed 
with a design of a Hathor cow and two ears, have 
every appearance of being twenty-sixth dynasty 
Saite work, and are purely Egyptian in design. 
The two necklaces also, made up of faience, 
carnelian, and other beads, contain many scarabs 
which may with some certainty be assigned to the 
eighteenth dynasty. Under these circumstances 
it looks as if Ferlini's statements about their f>rovc- 
iiaiicc were exceedingly doubtful. These criticisms, 
however, do not affect the rings, bracelets, chains, 
etc., which are very remarkable and quite unique. 
Their designs bear a close relationship to the 
ornaments depicted on the Meroitic reliefs, and 
are a strange mixture of barbaric work and the 
Greco- Egyptian style of the late Ptolemaic period 
which had evidently penetrated into the Ethiopian 
kingdom after the reign of Ergamenes in the third 
century B.C. So that, although there may be 
considerable doubt as to the exact provenance of 
the Ferlini collection, there is no doubt that the 
objects are of genuine Meroitic workmanship and 
origin, even if extraneous Egyptian objects were 
added by Ferlini in the hope of adding to the 
value of the whole. This treasure forms the 
backbone of the Berlin collection, and Dr. Schafer 
has done it full justice. The illustrations in colour 
are good, but do not compare with the reproduc- 
tions of M. Legrain's beautiful drawings of the 
Dashur jewellery published by M. de Morgan in 
1895, which should form a model to all who 
attempt to reproduce ancient work of this kind. 

P. D. S.-M. 

La Scultura in Bologna nel secolo XV. 

Ricerche e Studi. By I. B. Supino. Pp. 223 ; 

31 plates. Bologna : Zanichelli. 1910. 
The history of sculpture in Bologna, as we are 
reminded in the introduction to this interesting 
volume, is peculiar in the contrast which it reveals 
between the plenty of fine works to be seen in the 

city and the lack of local talent. For Bologna 
produced no single sculptor of rank. These 
studies are therefore concerned with natives of 
Florence, Venice, Siena and other cities. They 
are based on a good deal of solid research — the 
documents, many of them now for the first time 
printed, fill sixty-six pages — and, what is better 
still, show much sobriety of judgment. We 
enjoy, as we read, a sense of security too often 
absent from books of this kind. It does not of 
course follow that all the author's views will be 
accepted. His explanation, for instance, of that 
lack of native sculptors is that it was due to the 
politically disturbed state of the city ; but the 
history of Perugia and many another place is 
sufficient to prove that the arts are not strangled 
by the prevalence of battle, murder and sudden 
death. Again, Signor Supino's theory of a Dalmatian 
source for the peculiar types of the Evangelists on 
the Area of S. Domenico has much to recommend 
it, though, as he himself admits, such types could 
be seen no farther afield than Venice. And 
Niccolo was near Venice when he was working (as 
there is reason to suppose he was) at Ferrara in 
1456 ; or indeed, if he was really a Dalmatian, he 
probably came to Italy via Venice. But the 
influence of the sculptors whom he may have 
known at Ferrara entirely fails, it seems to us, to 
account tor the grotesque and hysterical exaggera- 
tions of his earliest work at Bologna, the Sepolero 
in S. Maria della Vita. So that we know little 
more than we did before about the secret of this 
strange artist. The author is, we think, at his 
best in the chapter on Jacopo della Quercia. The 
Sienese, he rightly urges, had nothing to learn 
from what he found at Bologna or Ferrara ; 
his filiation, so far as he shows any, is with 
the Pisan school. We cannot, however, see 
that the monument of Ilaria del Carretto reveals 
his early training as a goldsmith. Largeness 
of style and the sense of poised mass, the last 
things to be learned from goldsmithery, charac- 
terize this and, in fact, all the work of the sculptor. 
With all the writer's other remarks on this 
subject, including his partition of the reliefs of 
San Petronio between master and pupils, we are 
in essential agreement. This chapter gives a 
fully documented history of the 'maledetta portta,' 
as a harassed official, in the bitterness of his soul, 
once called it. There are no more ' human ' 
documents than those relating to Jacopo della 
Quercia, and the author has done well to repro- 
duce here all that concerns his work at Bologna. 
A very interesting light is thrown on the problem 
of the statues in the lunette by the record which 
he has unearthed of a statue, once existing, of 
Martin V, dated 1429 ; for this may well have been 
made by Jacopo for the place afterwards filled by 
St. Ambrose. We hope that Signor Supino 
will supplement this valuable work by another 


Reviews and Notices 

dealing with the many other problems which 
space has prevented his considering. What does 
he think, for instance, about the authorship of the 
tomb of Domenico Garganelli ? Is it possible to 
say who made the curious high relief of the 
Nativity in the Museo Civico, with a kneeling 
donor presented by a saint with drawn sword ? 

G. F. H. 

Wood Carvings in English Churches. Miseri- 
cords by Francis Bond. Henry Frowde, 
Oxford University Press. 1910. 7s. 6d. 
The persistence of error is nowhere more clearly 
illustrated than in the case of misericords, the stale 
and worn-out error concerning which, since it suits 
the taste of the public, is constantly kept alive not 
only by ignorant vergers, but also by amateur 
ciceroni who ought to know better. Again and 
again one is assured that the hinged quire-seats 
(which thoughtless folk call by the incorrect and 
meaningless name of ' misereres ') were intended 
to shut down with a crash to the confusion of the 
unwary monk who slumbered at his devotions. It 
is useless to suggest to these blind leaders of the 
blind the inherent improbability of thousands upon 
thousands of devoted persons having taken vows 
only to be involved in aperennialpractical joke, fit 
rather for the knockabout antics of variety enter- 
tainers than for the serious calling of religious life ; 
but perhaps the confidence of these same blind 
leaders may be somewhat shaken by learning that 
the misericord was not peculiar to monastic quires, 
but that it survives to this day in churches which 
never were in any sense monastic — e.g., m St. 
George's Chapel, Windsor, where all the stalls of 
the Knights of the Garter, ingluding that of the 
Sovereign, are fitted with misericords. If the popular 
account of the latter is true, the king himself was as 
liable as the humblest monk in his dominions to 
exposure and ridicule by this means — a proposition 
not, of course, to be entertained for a moment. The 
fact is that the misericord, as its name implies, was 
designed solely to afford bodily relief from the strain 
and fatigue of long hours of standing during the 
daily recitation of the psalter. Hence the old ritual 
direction runs: '/;/ ecclcsia . . . super misericord iain 
sedilis siti . . . qniescit.' This point, though not. 
elaborated, is brought out clearly enough in Mr. 
Bond's chapter on the nomenclature and use of 
misericords. The greater part of his work deals 
with the ornamentation of the misericord and 
the classification and explanation of the various 
devices which appear upon it. The range of 
subjects is a wide one, embracing, as it does, 
besides Biblical scenes and characters of saintly 
legend. Eastern and classical mythology, mediaeval 
romance, heraldry, satire and allegory, illustrations 
from the Bestiary, from agriculture, and of the 
many homely pursuits which go to make up the 
life of a people, but do not find their way into 

history books. Among one of the most interesting 
of the legends portrayed is that of the flight of 
Alexander the Great. In this case, though some 
versions name birds, all Mr. Bond's examples 
show griffins as the means of locomotion. He 
omits to mention the example of the same subject 
that occurs in a misericord at Whalley, Lancashire; 
he does not refer to the smaragd stone, mounted 
on the summit of the upright posts of Alexander's 
car, as the incentive to the creatures to fly upward; 
nor does he quote the graphic description of the 
ancient writer, who describes how Alexander 
mounted so high above the earth that the rivers 
beneath him appeared like writhing adders. As 
regards topographical distribution, it is, perhaps, 
not to be expected that an author should be 
acquainted with out of the way instances like the 
misericords at Clynnog Fawr, in Wales, but those 
of Newark, in Nottinghamshire, are a somewhat 
serious omission. The book is lavishly illustrated, 
but, considering its limited formation and the deli- 
cate minuteness of much of the detail, it might 
with advantage have contained a lesser quantity 
of illustrations but those of full-page size. The 
volume concludes with useful indices to places 
and of the examples illustrated, as well as of the 
subjects mentioned in the text. A. V. 

Die Mittelalterlichen Chorstuhle in der 
SCHWEiz. Von Joseph Scheuber. Strassburg : 
Heitz. 1910. 
The 128th monograph of the * Studien zur 
Deutschen Kunstgeschichte ' series is devoted to 
the subject of mediaeval quire-stalls in Switzer- 
land. They may be classified respectively under 
three heads. Of the first, early Gothic, which 
corresponds approximately to our * Early English,' 
the stalls in the Franciscan Church at Friburg 
afford a typical instance. Their trefoiled panelling, 
annulated shafts and other details might have been 
produced almost anywhere in Western Europe ; 
but the elaborately sculptured volute ornaments 
at the extremities and the severe treatment of the 
misericords differentiate them strikingly from any 
English work of the period. Indeed, throughout 
Switzerland the misericord is a mere console, 
lacking the ' supporters,' or side-wings, which 
constitute one of the most familiar features in our 
native specimens. 

The second period, known as Hoch-Gotik, on 
the score that it represents the highest point of 
Gothic achievement, is the equivalent of our 
' Decorated.' Of this phase the Cistercian convent 
church at Maigraugeand St. Fran9ois at Lausanne 
furnish examples. During this period the slacken- 
ing of the tie of uniformity was gradually taking 
place ; but it is the third phase — that of late 
Gothic — which represents the ultimatedevelopment 
of mediaeval art previously to the Renaissance of 
classic forms. This period synchronizes roughly 


Revkv^s and Notices 

witli our ' Perpendicular,' and is signalised by the 
brandling off of Gothic into parallel but distinct 
paths of divergence in conformity with local or 
national tastes. The differences of style then 
became so marked that the stall-work can no 
longer be treated as a single entity, but needs to 
be grouped according as it is dominated by the 
influence of a Gallic or a Teutonic strain. A 
notable contrast between the two is the rich 
figure-sculpture in low relief which decorates 
the stall-backs of French Switzerland, and the 
absence of figure-work in the same position in 
the stall-backs of German Switzerland. In the 
latter, as represented by the examples at Basel, 
St. Wolfgang (i486), Zurich and Coire, the orna- 
ment is almost exclusively based on vegetable 
forms ; one specially characteristic variety being 
flat-carving, which is exceedingly decorative in 
effect, yet so entirely free from rounded modelling 
that the pattern can be rubbed as easily as an 
engraved brass. The stall-back at St. RIaurice, 
Zofingen, affords a typical instance of this mode 
of treatment, though the front is ornamented with 
traceries in several planes of relief, and, moreover, 
has a bold standing figure surrounded by scrolls, 
all of flat work, in the central panel. In French 
Switzerland the single figures in the different 
panels have no necessary connexion with each 
other beyond the fact that they form units in a 
series of prophets or apostles ; but some of the 
figures at Friburg, though occupying separate 
panels, together constitute a group of the Adoration 
of the Magi. Except in the earliest period, over- 
hanging canopies may be regarded as universal. 
The author is to be congratulated not only on his 
excellent researches, but also on the fact that 
iconoclastic crises, which might have devastated 
the churches of Switzerland as completely as they 
have Scotland (where mediaeval stalls remain only 
at King's College, in Aberdeen, and at Dunblane 
Cathedral), and certain well-meant, but disastrous, 
' restorations ' have spared enough material for 
scientific classification, and for the illustrating of 
a valuable and exhaustive study. A. V. 

George Romney. By Arthur B. Chamberlain. 

With seventy-three plates. Methuen and Co. 

1910. I2S. 6d. net. 
It is but a short time since we noticed in this 
magazine the critical account of George Romney 
and his works included by Mr. M. H. Spielmann in 
his History of Portrait-Painting in England. Mr. 
Spielmann in comparing Romney with his great 
contemporaries explained very lucidly his reasons 
for rating Romney somewhat lower than Reynolds 
or Gainsborough. Romney has, however, found 
a more sympathetic biographer in Mr. Arthur B. 
Chamberlain, who contributes a valuable and 
interesting volume to the series of Classics of Art 
now being issued by Messrs. Methuen and Co. 


The story of Romney's life is well known, and 
it was not likely that any writer would be able to add 
much to what had been written before. Mr. 
Chamberlain has evidently made a prolonged study 
of a subject in which he feels a real personal 
interest. He is, therefore, able to tell the story 
of Romney's life with some authority. It is 
interesting to learn that it was to some extent due 
to Mrs. Gardner, mother of Daniel Gardner, the 
crayon-painter, that Romney's early bent towards 
painting was encouraged. Seeing also how much 
Romney owed to his master, Christopher Steele, 
to whom Romney was apprenticed for four years, 
one would fain ask what has become of the 
portraits painted by Steele, which Romney himself 
considered to be as good as anything Hudson 
painted? Where, for instance, is Steele's portrait 
of Lawrence Sterne, painted at York, while 
Romney was working as an apprentice in Steele's 
studio ? 

Mr. Chamberlain does not attempt to condone 
Romney's desertion of his young wife, although 
he thinks, and justly too, that this act was not 
premeditated. Premeditation, indeed, was a 
faculty in which Romney was throughout life 
extremely deficient. His temperament lent itself 
to the visionary mysticism of the time, and he was 
so continually subject to anxiety or depression of 
spirits, that in later life he became more or less a 
confirmed hypochondriac. It is not surprising, 
therefore, that his last days were spent in a state of 
mental decay, comforted by his most exemplary 
wife, who, as his friend Hayley writes, had never 
been irritated to an act of unkindness or an ex- 
pression of reproach by his years of absence and 

Mr. Chamberlain has done his task well, and 
one is not disposed to search for defects in a work 
involving so much detailed research. Mr. Cham- 
berlain is in error in stating that the famous 
portrait of William Cowper, the poet, in crayons 
by Romney, was presented to the National Portrait 
Gallery by Mrs. H. R. Vaughan Johnson ; it was, 
on the contrary, one of the most expensive 
purchases which the trustees of that gallery have 
been called upon to make out of their slender 

Mr. Chamberlain is hardly accurate in saying 
that Romney was forgotten almost as soon as he 
was dead, and that his finest portraits were regarded 
with indifference and were often pushed away into 
corners as of no account. Family portraits by 
Romney were treasured in many houses through- 
out England. Frederick Locker's lines to his 
grandmother's portrait by Romney were published 
in 1857, in which he says: 'were Romney's 
limning true, what a lucky dog were you, 
Grandpapa ! ' It is true that the value of Romney's 
pictures in the market has increased to an over- 
exaggerated extent; but this is due probably to 

Reviem and Notices 

the accidental circumstance that the first of the 
Winter Exhibitions at the Royal Academy in 
1871, at which Roraney was introduced, as it 
were, to the public gaze, happened to synchronize 
with the rise and development of certain great 
firms of picture dealers, as well as of the new race 
of millionaire trade potentates in America and 
elsewhere. Romney's portraits thus suddenly 
became a valuable commodity in the market, so 
that many were brought to light which might 
otherwise have reposed peacefully in the homes 
for which they were painted. When death duties 
and increased taxation on land and large incomes 
also entered the fields, the possession of a Romney 
became something like a penalty in itself. Mr. 
Chamberlain has a dangerous tendency to gloat 
over the prices paid for portraits by Romney, 
although such prices are by no means certain 
indications of their artistic value. 

Mr. Chamberlain makes no attempt at a cata- 
logue of Romney's known paintings, an omission 
which very much reduces the value of his book. 
So much material has been provided by Messrs. 
Humphry Ward and Roberts already that it 
would not have been difficult to supply what was 
wanting in their catalogue. The method of illus- 
tration, too, calls for criticism. The German series 
of Klassiker der Kunst on which Messrs. Methuen's 
series is assuredly modelled, owes its chief value 
to the complete series of reproductions of pictures 
by the painter who is the subject of this volume. 
Messrs. Methuen have followed this excellent 
example in such volumes in the series as Mr. 
Dillon's ' Rubens,' but in this volume on Romney 
no such attempt has been made. A selection of 
portraits has been made, chiefly of Lady Hamilton 
and other pretty women, which are interspersed 
among the pages without any reference to the text. 
No early portrait is reproduced ; no big work in 
history. It is the old story over again, which has 
so often ruined English art and English literature, 
that a venture which starts with a serious aim and 
with serious scholarship degenerates quickly into 
a mere popular picture book suitable for the 
Christmas season. L. C. 

English Furniture of the Eighteenth Cen- 
tury. By Herbert Cescinsky, London : 
Sadler and Co. 
It is not very long ago that a Chippendale chair 
might have been bought for five shillings ; but the 
handsome volumes on old English furniture which 
have lately been published serve to remind us that 
such chances will not occur again. Mr. Macquoid's 
work, not long ago completed, was welcomed as an 
addition to the literature of art. It seemed almost 
to give us the last word on the subject. Mr. 
Cescinsky has shown that something still remained 
to be said. He has been obliged to go over again 
much of the ground covered by Mr. Macquoid, 

but his volume contains a good deal that is new — 
perhaps even a little more than the subject demands. 
There is too much gossip of the Court. A tabulated 
list of European sovereigns occupies two pages, 
though it may be doubted whether the duration of 
the reigns of Amurath IV, and Clement XI, the 
peevishness of William III, or the unsafe condition 
of the streets at night, had much to do with the 
development of English furniture. Other new 
features — the chapters on clocks in relation to their 
cases, the diagrams of brass-fittings and clock-hands, 
and many of the technical notes of the cabinet- 
maker's craft, will be more readily welcomed. 

An impression left by a perusal of the book, 
is that the author has laid too much stress 
on foreign influence, omitting to make due allow- 
ance for parallel development. Perhaps his views 
on certain foreign articles of furniture have partly 
been the cause. The Spanish or Portuguese chair 
(fig. 12), if it were of the year 1620, might well be 
the forerunner of the English chairs of the closing 
years of the century ; but the character of the 
carved ornament shows that the chair is itself of 
the latter date. At page 16 the theory is put 
forward that the Portuguese in the seventeenth 
century copied the chairs of Northern India. It 
is doubtful whether those early European visitors 
found many chairs to copy. It may also be asked 
whether the Italian chair (fig. 27) does not belong 
to the end rather than the beginning of the seven- 
teenth century, and whether the cabinet ^fig. 114), 
described as unquestionably Italian, is not really 
from the neighbourhood of Augsburg. 

In the next edition Mr. Cescinsky will no doubt 
correct the printer's errors, and remove unnecessary 
repetitions and other marks of hasty writing. A 
few more points should then receive attention. 
The little walnut frame (fig. 370) stated to be 
Florentine, belongs to the school of the Barili of 
Siena. The panelling and chimney-piece (fig. 368), 
given as typical of the periods of Charles II and 
James 1 1, might stand as typical of that of James I. 
The cabinet (fig. 118) should be considered apart 
from the legs. There is nothing which forbids 
it being earlier than 1685. In fact, it belongs 
to the middle of the century. The legs, of course, 
are of the later date. Mr. (not ' Sir ') W. Massey- 
Mainwaring died some years ago, when his chairs 
were acquired for the nation. ' Glenham ' refers 
to Glemham in Suffolk. 

A word as to the illustrations. The photographer 
has latterly so far displaced the draughtsman, that 
he should learn to have an artist's sympathy with his 
subject,ratherthan sacrifice everything to definition 
of detail. The ill-proportioned ' bull-dog ' appear- 
ance of so many of the chairs illustrated (e.g., fig. 85) 
is due to the camera. We do not look at a chair on 
the level chosen by the photographer. To get 
the true effect, the chair should be tilted forward 
slightly, and a longer-distance lens employed. The 

V 247 

Reviews a fid Notices 

djliciencies ol the volume have been perhaps too 
much dwelt upon. There are many merits, which 
will be easily discovered by a discriminating reader. 
The author lias a familiar acquaintance with his 
sul-iject, and the book is clearly printed, copiously 
illustrated, and solidly bound. A. K. K. 

The Wye. Painted by Sutton Palmer, described 

by A. C. Bradley. 
Pompeii. Painted by Alberto Pisa, described by 

\V. M. Mackenzie. London : A. and C. Black. 

1910. 7s. 6d. net. 

Messrs. A. and C. Black have long been noted 
for the number and excellence of their Guide- 
Books, but the great developments in the art of 
coloured illustration have led them into a new 
path of enterprise, which has already met with 
considerable success. The two volumes before us 
are a happy combination of guide-book and pic- 
ture-book, food for the mind as well as pleasant 
food for the eye. In the case of the Wye, the 
most charming and attractive of English rivers, 
Mr. Bradley traces with a practised pen the course 
of the river from Plinlimmon to Chepstow, noting 
the chief places of interest on its course, with just 
enough historical information to interest the reader 
without diverting him too much from the illustra- 
tions. Mr. Sutton Palmer's drawings are extremely 
.attractive, and he has caught the spirit of the Wye 
very well. Those who love this river will enjoy 
this volume, and many a happy recollection will 
be revived by the glimpses given in Mr. Sutton 
Palmer's sketches. We note a slight misprint on 
page 93, where Penystone Court should read 

The book on Pompeii is naturally a great con- 
trast to the above. Whereas everything connected 
with the Wye is picturesque and joyful as it bustles 
and hurries down to meet the Severn, Pompeii is 
all sad, cold, and dead. It is not to be wondered 
at, therefore, that Signor Pisa's clever drawings 
seem to be a little chilly and monotonous. This 
is due to their subject, not to the artist, who evi- 
dently feels the limitations of his subject. The 
illustrations are accompanied by an account of 
Pompeii and its excavations by Mr. W. M. Mac- 
kenzie, which is extremely thorough and, perhaps, 
the most readable account which has as yet been 
published. The author says that his volume is 
neither a guide-book nor an archasological treatise, 
but that he has aimed at a reconstruction of the 
life of the old town. It is just this mode of treat- 
ment, when carried out so well, which will com- 
mend the book to the general reader, to whom we 
can safely recommend it. In both volumes the 
colour-printing is for the most part quite satisfac- 
tory, the crude reds and greens, which so often 
mar such reproductive work, being much less 
apparent. L. C. 


The Closet ov Sir Kenelm Digry Opened. 
Newly edited. By Anne Macdonell. London: 
Philip Lee Warner. 19 10. 7s. 6d. 

No one could help being grateful to Miss 
Macdonell for rescuing from oblivion and giving to 
the world this delightful book of cookery receipts, 
compiled by that English Don Quixote, Sir Kenelm 
Digby. Digby is chiefly interesting for artists as 
the friend and boon-companion of Van Dyck. 
We cannot in this magazine dilate upon the book's 
contents, but recommend it for instruction and 
amusement. We are, however, entitled in this 
magazine to call attention to the beauty of the print- 
ing, which is in every way worthy of the Kiccardi 
Press, which under Mr. Lee Warner's direction is 
laying up a new store of treasures for future biblio- 
graphers. L. C. 


Messrs. P. and D. Colnaghi and Co. have 
published a new mezzotint engraving by Mr. 
Scott Bridgwater from the well-known portrait of 
Miss Bingham by Hoppner, in the collection of Earl 
Spencer at Althorp. Only 250 artist's proofs are 
issued, at eight guineas each. Mr. Bridgwater 
has made a most successful and attractive render- 
ing of this portrait, which should be very popular. 
If we have any criticism to pass, it is that in 
seeking to render truthfully the actual strokes and 
values of the painter's brush, Mr. Bridgwater has 
rather transgressed the bounds of the mezzotint 
engraver's art, and approached dangerously near 
to that of the photo-engraver. We do not say 
this in any way of depreciation, but only to call 
attention to the risk of losing some of the rare 
qualities of a pure mezzotint-engraving, however 
restricted these may be. 

The rate of the Medici Society's production is 
so great that it is difficult in a full periodical to 
keep pace with it and do justice to its quality. 
As has been stated before in these pages, each 
print may be regarded as an experiment, so it is 
satisfactory to note that, in the case of portraiture, 
the experimental stage seems to be almost past. 
The famous portrait of Cromwell (12s. 6d.) at 
Sidney Sussex College is now accessible to the 
public in a form convincing as regards the personal 
appearance of the great Protector. Reynolds's 
portrait of Laviiiia, Countess Spencer (17s.), and 
Gainsborough's Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire 
(25s.), both at Althorp Park, illustrate well the 
differences between those two great painters. A 
print must naturally fall far short of a paint- 
ing in texture and surface qualities, but these 
two are excellent counterfeits. Another excel- 
lent portrait is Lawrence's Georgina Lennox 
(17s. 6d.), afterwards Countess Bathurst, the 

^W Trims 

property of the present Earl. The Boy and Girl 
(215.), by the Rev. M. W. Peters, R.A., in the 
Diploma Gallery, BurUngton House, having little 
subtlety of technique so that the painted surface 
easily lends itself to reproduction, is an excellent 
choice and should be veiy popular. Still better 
is Reynold's fancy portrait called T/ic Age of 
Innocence (12s. 6d.), one of the pictures in the 
National Gallery best known to the public at 
large. Unhappily it was painted with the 
bituminous paint which destroyed so many 
English pictures of the eighteenth century ; 
reduction in size has to some extent helped to 
lessen the ugly effect of the cracks, though they 
are faithfully reproduced. Among foreign por- 
traits, Nattier's Madame Adelaide (17s. 6d.) is 
again a simpler matter to deal with, since Nattier has 
not thesubtlety of some of the English portraitists — 
Gainsborough, for example. On the other hand 
Van Dyck's Philip, Lord Wharton (17s. 6d.), in the 
Hermitage has to some extent baffled the Society 
by its peculiar scheme of colour and radiant beauty 
of tone. It is always exceedingly difficult to re- 
produce the quality of the Dutch and later Nether- 
lands masters, and Adriaen Brouwer's Gamblers 
(15s.) in the Pinacothek, Munich, is no exception to 
the rule ; an uncoloured reproduction would have 
displayed the master's technique better. Rem- 
brandt's Old Soldier fiss.) has proved a still more 
insuperable difficulty ; all the luminosity of the 
paint has inevitably disappeared. Similarly among 
Southern pictures the Jndith (20s.) of the 
Hermitage, so courageously restored to Giorgione 
by Mr. Claude Phillips, is not very successful, its 
pinks have become crude and unpleasing. 'The 
mellow light, which suffuses the rich colour of the 
Venetian school and adds so much poetic feeling 
to its works, is the result of a skilful succession 
of glazings, not unaided by the action of time ; 
and it is practically impossible to seize and fix it 
on paper. The " riposo " also, by Lucas Cranach 
the Elder (253.), in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum, 
Berlin, is not satisfactory ; the outline is hard and 
the flat colour is harsh and garish ; a disappoint- 
ment, since the sentiment of the composition is 
finer and more delicate than most of the paintings 
of the school and period. But these are pitfalls 
among which the Society has wisely chosen to 
test its powers. It is pleasant to chronicle finally 
a success in Zurbaran's Virgin at the Age of Six 
(15s.) in the Hermitage; here the Flemish green. 

the indigo, the siena-orange, the madder and the 
toned white of the drapery are well rendered. And 
returning once more to the Netherlands school, the 
Society has a still greater success, in fact, one of its 
masterpieces, in the 'riposo' usually attributed to 
Patinir (17s. 6d.), at Vienna. 

We wish that we could praise truly two large 
colour lithographic prints (some 25 by 30 in.), 
Windsor Castle and T/ie Thames from Richmond 
Hill, specimens of a series in course of pub- 
lication by Messrs. Asher & Co. at los. each, but 
praise is impossible. Perhaps the mechanical 
technique might stimulate discussion, though its 
merits are not salient, but the subjects of form 
and colour had better be avoided here, for we 
fear that neither have sufficient probability to 
satisfy the modest demands even of the amateur 
of views. The other subjects of the series are 
Westminster Abbey, The Toiccr Bridge, St. Paul's 
from the Thames, and The Houses of Parliament. 

We regret to hear from M. Meyer- Riefstahl that 
the following words in the first part of his article, 
' Vincent van Gogh ' (p. 98, 1. 13), do not accurately 
express his meaning: 'The painters who most 
influenced him in that period were, next to the 
artists of his native country, Ziem, Diaz, Monticelli, 
Millet and Delacroix.' M. Meyer-Riefstahl's words 
— ' Die Maler die ihn in der Zeit seiner Tiitigkeit 
begeistern sind neben den Kiinstlern seiner Heimat 
in ertser Linie Ziem, Diaz, Monticelli, Millet und 
Delacroix' — were intended by him in quite a 
different sense ; he writes : ' II est tout a fait 
impossible que j'ai dit que Ziem, Monticelli et 
Delacroix aient eu une influence sur I'impres- 
sionisme. Cela serait un erreur complete. C'est 
van Gogh qui s'est interess^ a ces artistes. L'im- 
pressionisme n'a rien a faire avec Ziem.' Wc 
sincerely hope that our English readers have not 
understood our translator's words in the sense to 
which the author objects. 

Our Paris correspondent writes asking us to 
draw attention to two slips of the pen in his notes 
on the Chauchard Collection (p. 194, line 5 from 
the bottom of the page), in which Decamps's 
' Christ in the Pretorium ' is given by implication 
to Delacroix ; and p. 195, 1. i, where Le Rabattcnr 
should read Le Vanncur. 


Japanese temples and their treasures. Compiled by the Dept. 
of the Interior, Imperial Japanese Govt. 3 vols. (i6x 11) 
Tokyo (The Shimbi Shoin). Plates and text in portfolios. 
Hy.«i (J. C). Biskra, Sidi-Okba and the desert. A practical 

* Sizes (height X width) in inches. 

handbook for travellers. (7 x 5) Algiers (Hyam). 102 pp., 

Calvert (A. F.). Catalonia and the Balearic Isles. (8x5) 

London (Lane), 3s. 6d. net. 256 plates. 
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England) : an 

inventory of the historical monuments in Hertfordshire 

(11 X 8) London (Wyman), us. 6d. Map, plates and plans. 


Recent Art Ptdhlications 

Besant (Sir W.). London : tlic city. (11X9) London (Black), 
30s. net, lUustiatcd. The first vol. of the author's topo- 
graphical ' Survey of London.' 

Cox ij. C). County churches : Norfolk. 2 vols. Morris 
(J. E.). Surrey. (7x4) London (Allen), 2S. 6d. net eacli. 

Veillf.T (Canon R.). Kecherchcs sur la ville ct sur rc.ylise dc 
Bayonne. Manuscrit, public pour la premiere fois avec des 
notes ct des gr.ivures par I'abbe V. Dubarat et I'abbc J. B. 
Daran.atz. Vol. I. Bayonne (Lasserrc) ; Pau (Lafon), 50 fr. 
560 pp. 

DoEKiNG (O ), Deutschlands mittel.alterliche Kunstdenkmaler 
als Geschichtsquelle. (9x6) Leipzig (Hierscniann), 12 M. 
119 illus. Vol. vii of the publisher's ' H.andbiicher.' 

DiRCKS (R.). The later work of Alma-Tadenia. (13x10) 

London (Virtue), 2s. 6d. net. 'Art Journal' Christmas 

number. Illustrated. 
Stanton (T.). Reminiscences of Rosa Bonheur. (9x6) London 

(Melrose), 12s. 6d. net. 
Mayer (A.). Das Leben und die Werke der Briider Matthaiis 

und Paul Brill. (10x7) Leipzig (Hiersemann), 30 M. 

61 plates. 
OsBORN (M.). Franz Kriiger. (10x7) Leipzig (Velhagen and 

Klasing), 4 M. 104 illustrations. 
Lucas (A.). John Lucas, portrait painter, 1828-1S74. A memoir 

of his life mainly deduced from the correspondence of his 

sitters. (15x1:) London (Methuen), 63s. net. 94 illus- 
Garden (R. \V.). The life of Giorgio Vasari. A study of the 

later Renaissance in Italy. (9x6) London (Lee Warner), 

l6s. net. 
Johnson (A. E.). Lawson Wood. (9x6) London (Black's 

' Brush, Pen and Pencil ' series), 3s. 6d. net. 

Kataloge des Germanischen Nafionalmuseums. Josephi (W.). 

Die Werke pLasfischer Kunst. (11x9) Nuremberg (the 

Museum), 25 M. Illustrated. 
EscHNER (M.). Leipzigs Denkmiiler, Denksteine und Gedenk- 

tafeln. (7 x 5) Leipzig (Wigand). 200 pp., illustrated. 


Thomas (T. H.). French portrait engraving of the seventeenth 
and eighteenth centuries. (10x7) London (Bell), 15s. net. 

Delteil(L.). Manuel del'amateurd'estampes du XVIII" siecle. 
(10x7) Paris (Dorbon-aine), 25 fr. 106 illustratii^ns. 

ZiLCKEN (P.). Catalogue descriplif des eaux-fortes et litho- 
graphies de Alphonse Stengelin. (12 xS) The Hague 
(Impr. Mouton). 22 pp., illustrated. 

BURCH (R. M.). Colour printing and colour printers. (10x7) 
London (Pitman), 12s. 6d. net. 

Broadley (.\. M). Napoleon in caricature, 1795-1S21. With 
an introductory essay on pictorial satire as a factor in 
Napoleonic history, 2 vols. (9x6) London (Lane), 42s. 
net. Plates. 

Roth (H. Ling). Oriental silverwork ; Malay and Chinese. 

(11X8) London (Truslovc and Hanson), 2is. net. Over 

250 illustrations. 
Weinitz (F.). Die Landschaftsuhr und einige altcre Arbeitcn 

des Kunstgewerbes im Herzoglichen I'Jesidenz-Schlosse 

zu Altenburg, (12x9) Berlin (Glaue), 20 pp., 5 collotype 


Huelsen (C). II libro di Giuliano da Sangallo, codicc 

Vaticano Barberiniano latino 4424, Con introduzione c 

note. Testo (i6x 12) con 106 illustrazioni e 17 tavole. 

Tavole (24X 20). 138 collotypes. Leipzig (Harrassowitz). 

One of the series ' Codices e Vaticanis sclecti.' 
Van den Gheyn (J., S. /.). Histoire de Charles Martel. 

Reproduction des I02 mini.atures de Loyset Liedet (1470). 

(8 X 6) Brussels (Vromant), 20 fr. Collotype plates. 
Bate (P.). Modern Scottish portrait painters. VVith an intro. 

ductory essay, (11x9) Edinburgh (Schulze), 42s, Photo- 
Destree (J.) .and Van den Ven (P.). Tapisseries des Musees 

royaux du Cinquantenaire a Biuxelles. (7x5) Brussels 

(Vromant), 5 fr. 44 plates. 
Peasant .art in Sweden, Lapland and Iceland. (11 xS) London 

(' The Studio' autumn number), 5s. net. Illustrations, some 

in colour. 
Benn (H. P.) and Shapland (H. P.). The nation's treasures : 

measured drawings of old furniture in the Victoria and 

Albert Museum. (12x10) London (Simpkin, Marshall; 

Benn), 2s. 6d. 72 pp., text and drawings. 
He.\th (S.). Old English houses of alms. With architectural 

and historical notes. (13 x 10) London (Grifiiths), 21s. net. 

Facsimiles of drawings. 
Dobson (a.). Old Kensington Palace and other papers. (8 x 5) 

London (Ch,atto and Windus). Includes: Madame Vigee- 

LebruD, Chambers the architect, etc. 6 plates. 
Weber (F, P.). Aspects of death and their effects on the living. 

As illustrated by minor works of art, etc, (9x6) London 

(Unwin), 5s. net. Illustrated. 
Stockum {SN . P. van). La librairie, I'imprimerie et la presse 

en Hollande a travers quatre siecles. (14x11) The Hague 

(issued on the occasion of the Seventh Publishers' Congress), 

1910. With 216 reproductions of printing, title pages, etc. 

The binding is a facsimile of a 1476 stamped V^eldener. 
A small collection of Japanese lacquer made by James Orange. 

(10x5) Yokohama, Shangai (Kelly and Walsh) 50 collotype 



H. T. BOSSERT has discovered three new paintings 
by the Suabian Master Hans Muhscher, in the 
Gallery at Wolfegg, where they passed under the 
name of H. Aldegrever. Together they form a 
wing of a large triptych, the central part and other 
wing of which have not yet been discovered. The 
outside panel shows an Entombment, the inside 
two subjects ranged one above the other, and 
chosen from the Legend of the Holy Cross and 
King Heraclius. The same gentleman claims to 
have discovered a new painting by the Meister 
des Hausbuchsat the Karlsruhe Gallery. In course 
of recent renovations at this Museum, this picture 
was discovered among those stored away. It 
represents Christ crowned with thorns,and Bossert 
suggests that it was painted about 1450 at 

The Museum at Leipsic has purchased a Leibi, 
Old Woman Spinning, painted in 1892, for 75,000 
marks, at the La-Roche-Ringwold sale: Justi 
bought at the same sale a Munkacsy, Gipsies 
Resting in the Woods, for 12,500 marks for the 
National Gallery at Berlin. The former gallery 
has also acquired some modern French paintings 
at the exhibition recently held there: viz., Raffaelli, 
La Place de la Concorde at Paris; Pissarro, 
L'Avcnnc del' Opera, and a large canvas byCormon; 
lastly one of Segantini's best known pictures, The 
Frnit of Love, painted in the beginning of the 
nineties of last century, and the well known 
bronze by Rodin representing S7. John the Baptist. 
The Museum at Cologne has received Courbet's 
hunting picture, Halali, as a gift from Mr. L. 
Tietz. H. W. S. 


A SUNG I.AIiY AT llll; TolLl':!-. W A IKK-Col.c a'K lJl;A\\IM, op- THK I'XRLIEK MIXG PERIUH, 














incident in the life of a director 
of a public gallery than a gift such as i; 
bequest. In the 


— > 


id could liOi oliaiic iiiiiiaca quite free 

ii^jin this posthumous vanity, and failed 

to see that it would be the individual 

the case of Mr. Salting's 

5t the te nunnber oi 

o, which \% ouij add lustre to 

Thf^ Trre Gallery is another 

ilty, thou|^h in this 

mce, ' nd 

.: iife- 

U( iJ-i'-'i 

as a national p It is a pardon- 

able vanity in a collector to wish that the 
;ch are to his heart, 

'• ' '^ lied so mu^h 

. rsed after his 
■avs remain labelled 
-arent act of 

r acce. 
-ring c 

.. ......... ._; ^uibarrassmenr. and 

)n for future administrators 

We ncetl not look to France for an illus- 
rion of this dilemma. We have at 

huivie in the Victoria and Albert Museu'^ 

^ of the danger whi( 
run by attaching too rigid to 

the acceptance of their bequcoCs, roi in 
this instance the gift of land which formed 
part of the bequest proved too tempting a 
morsel for the City Fathers of Glasgow to 
refuse ; the Maclellan pictures were, 
thercfc-- • - - " ^ -- •• ' — "'Me burden, 
v1 * not until 

fter the testator's 
aiue of this bequest 
ized. The 
.... ^,.--.- Deq'','"^'- 'i^ 
nation have 
Magazine, and have 
■et by tack" 

tnft Ci 




received from our corre- 
spondent in Paris opens 
'afresh a subject for dis- 
cussion which affects this 

^country as much as it 

does our neighbours. The collection of 
modern French pictures collected by M. 
Chauchard, a highly respected tradesman 
in Paris, bequeathed to the Louvre and 
accepted there, has, since it was opened 
for public exhibition, met with somewhat 
severe criticism. There is no more trying 
incident in the life of a director or curator 
of a public gallery than a gift such as the 
Chauchard bequest. In the eyes of the 
public — and in many cases a board of 
directors is both illustrative of and de- 
pendent upon popular opinion — the mere 
fact that a work of art, or a collection of 
works of art, may have cost a large sum 
of money is sufficient to prove it desirable 
as a national possession. It is a pardon- 
able vanity in a collector to wish that the 
collections which are so near to his heart, 
and on which he has lavished so much 
expense, should not be dispersed after his 
death, and should always remain labelled 
with his name. By an apparent act of 
generosity he is in reality perpetuating his 
own personal vanity in a concrete form. 
Directors and boards of trustees are, 
through his action, confronted with the 
disagreeable choice between rejecting a 
bequest, or sometimes a gift, of undoubted 
value, and thereby drawing on themselves 
public reproach, or accepting as a whole, 
with all the fettering conditions which 
may be attached, a collection which can 
only prove a source of embarrassment and 
dissatisfaction for future administrators. 
We need not look to France for an illus- 
tration of this dilemma. We have at 
home in the Victoria and Albert Museum 

the Jones collection of furniture and works 
of art, a collection formed in much the 
same way as the Chauchard collection, 
containing many objects of undoubted 
value, but burdened by objectionable 
conditions. Even the late Mr. Ludwig 
Mond could not shake himself quite free 
from this posthumous vanity, and failed 
to see that it would be the individual 
quality, as in the case of Mr. Salting's 
bequest, and not the aggregate number ot 
his bequests, which would add lustre to 
his name. The Tate Gallery is another 
example of this difficulty, though in this 
particular instance, as the collection and 
the gallery formed a gift during the life- 
time of the donor, the donor was saved to 
a great extent from the penalty of having 
his generous intentions treated with 
obloquy and contempt by an ungrateful 
posterity. The fate of the Maclellan 
bequest at Glasgow affords yet another 
example of the danger which benefactors 
run by attaching too rigid conditions to 
the acceptance of their bequests, for in 
this instance the gift of land which formed 
part of the bequest proved too tempting a 
morsel for the City Fathers of Glasgow to 
refuse ; the Maclellan pictures were, 
therefore, accepted as an inevitable burden, 
and treated as such, and it was not until 
many years had elapsed after the testator's 
death that the real value of this bequest 
was brought to light and recognized. The 
difficulties relating to the great bequest by 
Turner to the British nation have already 
been discussed in this Magazine, and have 
to a great extent been met by tacking on 
Turner as a supplement to Sir Henry 
Tate. A still more recent incident in the 
Shipley bequest of pictures and money to 
the City of Newcastle-on-Tyne will be 
fresh in our readers' memories, but even 
in this instance there were not wanting 

The BURLIXGTOX Magazine, No, 95. Vol. XVIII.— February, lyii. 



On Bequests to Public Galleries 

persons who supported the acceptance of 
the bequest on the ground that the 
pictures must have cost the testator a 
great deal of money. 

With pictures, indeed, the difficulty is 
one of singular importance. The arrange- 
ment of pictures in a public institution 
must inevitably be on different lines to 
those followed in a private collection. An 
individual collector can arrange his rooms 
as he may happen to like, and change the 
arrangement as often as he may have the 
fancy. He can hang his Holbein, his 
Tintoretto, his Greco, his Jordaens, his 
Leighton, his Meissonier, and even his last 
Post-Impressionist acquisition, aU on one 
wall, if it should please him to do so, and 
the juxtaposition of these paintings might 
prove both interesting and instructive ; 
but in a public gallery of any importance, 
such an arrangement, unless imposed by 
legal tsTanny, would be regarded as 
a dangerous freak on the part of the 

It is difficult to suggest a remedy, 
which would be sure to meet with uni- 
versal acceptance. If any such remedy 
be adopted, it should be international and 
universal. A limit to the prohibitive 
action of bequests is, we believe, already 
sanctioned by law in this countr)% but we 
do not speak only for ourselves. America, 
for instance, has been probably as great a 
sufferer from the posthumous vanity of 
collectors as any country in Europe. 
Here we must make allowance for the 
somewhat raw intelligence of a new and 
rapidly developing nation, actuated at 
the outset by motives of competition and 
acquisition rather than by those of true 
artistic appreciation, which we are glad 
to observe in more recent days has been 
gradually, if somewhat slowly, gaining the 
upper hand. It is necessary' in most cases 
to consider if the value of the bequest 

exceeds or is equivalent to the burden 
oi the conditions which may be attached 
to it, and if those who accept the bequest 
are in a position not only to carry out the 
conditions themselves, but to enforce their 
acceptance on future administrations. 

It may be suggested that the following 
conditions should be regarded as generally 
acceptable, that a reasonable time-limit 
should be placed to the period during 
which a collection must be kept to- 
gether, if so enjoined by the testator ; 
that every object accepted as a bequest 
should be labelled with the testator's 
name, if this wish be indicated in the will; 
and that no object, accepted as a bequest, 
should be alienable, except as a loan to 
some other public institution in the public 
interest. Such conditions would insure the 
collector against the loss of credit to him- 
self by the merging of an object in the 
general collection. The British Museum 
has been fortunate in this way, as may be 
seen from the bequests of Mr. Felix Slade 
and Sir Augustus Wollaston Franks, 
whose memory, among others, is thus 
incorporated, it may be said, in the history 
of the museum. A recent bequest to the 
British Museum has lately been announced 
and brings the question once more to 
the front. The value of the Egyptian 
and other oriental collections, formed 
by Lady Meux, is not the matter in 
doubt, but whether the Keeper of 
this Departrhent of Antiquities can con- 
scientiously recommend the Trustees 
to comply with conditions which might 
prove a source of great perplexity and 
discomfort to his successors in that 
Department. We express our hope 
therefore that the Trustees of the British 
Museum will regard their decision in this 
particular instance as giving a lead to 
public opinion on this difficult question 
throughout the whole civilized world. 




drawings collected 

by Mr. F. 
J. O. Boymans and now in 
his foundation, the Boymans 
Museum of Rotterdam, there 
is a precious sheet of particular 
interest. Both sides of the 

paper are covered with studies, 

partly roughly sketched with the pen, partly 
carefully elaborated in grey wash. The photo- 
lithographs accompanying this note dispense me 
from giving a minute description. The measures 
are : iij in. by jf in. 

In the first catalogue of the Boymans collection, 
published in 1852, the present drawing is mentioned 
as ' No. 574. Quinten Metsys. Head of a man. 
Chinese ink.' 

The attribution is evidently wrong and needs 
no refutation. Thanks to this absence of critical 
sagacity, the drawing escaped from the conflagra- 
tion of the museum in 1867. The portfolio 
containing the Italian drawings, amongst which 
were several given to Michelangelo and Raphael, 
perished. Being preserved amongst the Flemish 
school, the so-called Quinten Metsys was saved. 

In the manuscript catalogue, compiled by my 
predecessor, Mr. P. Haverkorn van Rijsewijk, the 
drawing is reasonably given to the Italian School 
and described as follows : 

' Italian School. Several studies. On the one 
side a child's reclining head and its foot ; above 
it the face and neck of a young woman. At the 
top on the right side Italian words, half cut away 
and put in by a later hand [Plate]. 

' On the reverse several figures in various 
attitudes. At the top the date Anno 1479. In 
the middle, from another hand, the head of an old 
man, with cap and mantle, the throat being cut 
open. With pen and Chinese ink ' [Frontispiece]. 
As to the attribution, the close connexion of 
this drawing with the art of Andrea Mantegna 
must always have been evident. Even the least 
details show affinity with recognised works of the 
master. A comparison of the child's head with 
the head of the Infant Saviour in the Bergamo 
Madonna and Child is very conclusive. 

But as to the analysis of the drawing by my 
predecessor, a few objections may be formulated. 
At first sight the many small, broadly sketched 
figures, very different in execution from the big, 
washed heads, may suggest the interference of 
another hand, a closer examination proves that the 
same grey wash has been used all over and that all 
of the drawing (and the inscriptions too) came 
from the same hand and the same pen. Except a 
yellowish halo added round the child's head, the 

drawing has nowhere been 

As to the original dimensions of 


sheet, the 


arrangement of the figures between the edge of the 
paper and the left side of the big head, proves that 
only a small space can have been lost, certainly not 
more than about? a quarter of an inch on every 
side. The sheet was apparently taken out of a 
sketch-book, and theotherhalf of the La//« inscrip- 
tion was to be found on the page facing the present 

Two inches beneath the date, ano 1479, the 
signature 'And' is to be seen, evidently meant for 
Andreas ; on the other side of the sheet the letters 
' am\ placed underneath the remainder of an 
inscription, now cut off, are to be found, possibly 
also abbreviated for Andreas Mantinia. The 
inscription doWie dm ac malori meo is, perhaps, 
the beginning of a sentence, the rest of which 
might "have been in the lost part of the book. 
From the partly effaced Latin inscription several 
words can still be traced {duo, gracilis, sepelitur, 
etc.), but they do not make any sense. 

One cannot accept the description of the big 
head as a male face. I understand that at a first 
glance the square chin maysuggestamale person ; 
but the comparison with the types of elderly 
women drawn by Mantegna convinces me that 
the contrary is true. The Madonna lamenting 
over the dead Christ, in the Brera, the St. Elizabeth 
kneeling before the Madonna delta Vittoria or 
gravely smiling in The Holy Family, of the Dres- 
den canvas, show nearly identical features. The 
headdress, too, is feminine ; it is the usual costume 
of nearly all Mantegna's saints— the white kerchief 
surrounding the forehead and temples, covered by 
the dark mantle that envelops the head and shoul- 
ders. The resemblance to Mantegna's St. Elizabeth 
is so perfect that this head can only be meant as a 
study for a painting representing this saint, and 
I do not hesitate to keep to this desigtnaion. 

As to the ' throat cut open ' there is no such a 
thing. A silk scarf— the watered silk Mantegna 
was so fond of — is folded round the neck. I must 
acknowledge that this part of the drawing has 
been made less intelligible by a pcntimcnto, con- 
taining another outline for the throat. It was 
probably the moire pattern of the silk, like a net- 
work of veins, that suggested the ' throat cut open.' 
The circular arrangement of the smiU, sketchy 
figures becomes very plain if the head of St. Eliza- 
beth is anterior to them. They were distributed 
in this way in order not to spoil the effect of the 
big head. The date 1479 belongs, of course, exclu- 
sively to the figure across the thigh of which it is 
written. It gives the terminus ante qnem for the 
head of St. Elizabeth. 

The other side of the sheet is apparently from a 
much later period. Here the Child with the 
Madonna bending over it, is, for a similar reason 
as mentioned above, anterior to the fine, simply 

Two T>rawings by Andrea Mantegna 

outlined head of a young woman. This head is a 
study for the Mary Magdalen from the painting in 
the National Gallery, The Madonna and Cliild, 
attended by St. John the Baptist and St. Mary 
Magdalen, as a simple comparison will prove. The 
direction and expression of the regard, the oval of 
the face, the noble curves of the neck, the whole 
of the attitude, are exactly the same. 

I have insisted already upon the resemblance of 
of the Child's head with the one from the picture 
in the Accademia in Bergamo, but it cannot be 
properly called a study for this composition, 
neither 'for the similar subject in the Museo Poldi- 
Pezzoli, however great the alSnity may be. The 
famous engraving (B. 8,)' also representing the 
Madonna bending over the Child, contains, in a 
reversed position, exactly the same foot as is seen 
on the drawing. This study of the Infant Christ 
has, as it is often the case with Mantegna, far 
"i-eater merits than the finished compositions. 
'^ The figure that bears the date 1479 is obviously 
a study for the Christ at the Colnmn, in the en- 
graving The Flagellation, (B. i,).- The attitude 
appears, as natural, reversed in the engraving. 

Mr. Tancred Borenius kindly drew my attention 
to the fact, that the thrice sketched face, with the 
eyes turned up, is much akin to the head of a Satyr, 
in the engraving, T/ic Bacchanal ivith Silenus{B. 20).' 
The man in contemporary dress, seen on the 
left of St. Elizabeth, recalls, in his whole habitns, 
the frescoes in the Camera degli Sposi in Mantua 
and especially some of the figures that occur in 
the Meeting of Lndovico and Francesco Gonzaga. 

Some of the small nude figures show a striking 
affinity to one of the pntti supporting the dedica- 
tory cartello in the same room. 

The two sitting nudes, nearly in the same 
position, are evidently drawn from a lay figure, 
partly covered with a drapery. 

Looking through the above-mentioned con- 
nexions with dated or datable works, we may 
propose the period 1470-1480 for the gradually 
filling up of the main page and 1495-1500 for the 

A remarkable difference is to be noted in the 
technical execution of the two pages. The 
pictorial opposition of the deep black and the 
grey wash has been pathetically insisted upon, in 
the head of St. Elizabeth. The greyish wash used 
for the Infant Christ shows more refinement, the 
modelling is more delicate, the outlines less coarse 
and more elegant. There is everywhere a marked 
transition from a more pictorial conception to a 
sheer linear one. The comparison of the foot of 

iSee 'Catalogue of E.-iily Italian Engravings in the British 
Museum,' p. 337, i • 
3 Ibid., p. 346, 4. 
•'/6)rf., p. 338. 2- 

the Child with the big foot seen near the head of 
St. Elizabeth offers an excellent illustration of this 
evolution. The same remark can be made in 
comparing the repetition of the Satyr's mouth and 
nostrils with the lips of the Magdalen. This 
repetition of detached parts of the face, such as 
eyes and lips, are a special feature of this drawing. 
The same lips are even drawn seen from aside, a 
research for plasticity very characteristic of 
Mantegna's tendencies. 

The small broadly sketched figures are drawn 
in the same way as the brilliant study for the 
Eremitani fresco, in the possession of the Hon. E. 
Gathorne- Hardy, in London. Here the same 
tendency occurs, the summing up of the mass of 
body and attitude into a form as abbreviated as 
possible, bringing with it the utter neglect of the 
extremities, head, hands and feet. In the smallest 
of the nudes, at the top of the main page [FRONT.], 
the result of this tendency, so unusual for quattro- 
cento drawing, is shown to the extreme. 

There is a thrilling grandeur in the conception 
of the St. Elizabeth. She is to be imagined amidst 
the group of the Holy Family. Turning her 
piercing regard to the Madonna and Child, she 
realizes with eager joy and inner contentment the 
long and painfully awaited fulfilling of old 

That the expression is one of joy, and not of 
sorrow, may be clearly understood in considering 
the groups of sorrowful women in the Louvre 
Crucifi.xion or from the Entombment of Christ (B. 3).* 
In the scheme of facial expression adopted by 
Andrea's grave temperament, joy is always mingled 
with melancholy, and sorrow is rendered by 
vehement tensions of the facial muscles. Even 
the Satyrs in The Bacchanal (B. 20), instead of 
enjoying it, rather seem to suffer under the 
burden of their passionate delight. 

The contrast between the two sides of the sheet 
is striking. It results from the contrast between 
two periods of the artist's evolution. 

The earlier page [Front.] is overburdened with 
conceptions, boldly and feverishly executed, and 
crowded round the emaciated mask and withered 
skin of St Elizabeth. Her fierce regard, still 
burning with old desires, is coming deep from 
within, out of a long and cruelly tormented soul. 

The later drawing [Plate] contains the 
delicate bloom of a baby's face and the Olym- 
pic calm and nearly hieratic beauty of the 
young Magdalen ; it tells of the awakening of 
the Child by a gentle pressure of the Madonna's 
cheek ; it makes the eyes look in wonder, and the 
breathing heard. It denotes a tranquil and self- 
possessed elaborating of a clearly conceived ideal. 

* !bul.,p. 341, G. 








N Italy the one object of anti- 
quity that turns up in the soil 
more often than any other is 
the coin, and more often the 
coin of Imperial date than the 
RepubHcan. That is to say, the 
^^^1" portraits of the rulers of ancient 
!fci;^QRome must have been familiar 

to every person, who had the wit to make them 
out, from these little works of art rather than from 
the remains of sculpture. From the days of 
Petrarch and Rienzi onwards, Italians possessing 
the historic sense looked upon anything which 
could revive the memory of the heroes of 
antiquity with something like a passionate affec- 
tion. The attitude of these men towards such 
remains was a purely personal and ethical attitude. 
It was exactly parallel to the attitude which 
critics assumed towards ancient writers, as one 
may see, for instance, in the 'Quaestiones Camaldu- 
lenses ' of Cristoforo Landino, where Leone 
Battista Alberti, himself an artist and thinker of 
genius, discourses at length upon the hidden 
allegorical significance of the works of Vergil. 
The poetry, to put it baldly, is regarded merely as 
sugar for the philosophical pill. If the best 
intellects of the day saw great works of art in this 
light, it is not surprising — and it would be stupid 
to say that it is regrettable — that they treated 
minor objects in the same way. For their artistic 
value they cared little or nothing. They admired 
them for the moral lessons which they served to 
point. Petrarch was, it seems, one of the first 
persons to collect ancient coins, at any rate with 
a notion that they were not mere curiosities. 
There have always been, since collecting began, 
persons who collect simply with the object of 
making a complete series — an object to which 
Roman coins are particularly well suited — or with 
the very human desire of having things which 
most people cannot get ; nowadays we have also 
a few persons who look upon such collections 
as scientific material. In the days of which I am 
writing this last class practically did not exist, but 
was replaced by persons who saw in ancient coins 
a source of moral inspiration. So far was scientific 
truth subordinated in their thoughts to this other 
end that, where they had no original, they in all good 
faith invented the portraits of the ancients, from 
Adam and all the patriarchs downwards, as may 
be seen in one of the earliest illustrated books on 
the subject, Rouille's ' Promptuaire des Medailles' 
(Lyons, 1553).' Not merely engravings, but 
innumerable medals were made of persons, 
legendary or historical, for whose lineaments 
there was no ancient authority. A well-known 
medal of Aristotle, made in the fifteenth century, 
'Some of these are reproduced in Courajod's excellent little 
book on ' L'Imitation et la Contrefagon des Objets d'Art 
antiques aux XV^et XVI^ Siecles' (Paris, 1889). 

gives him the traditional features and headdress 
of the mediaeval sage. But we have later medals 
of Priain, Thales, Artemisia, Lysimachus, and any 
number of others, conceived in a more classical 
style. A minor medallist,^ Camillo Mariani, of 
Vicenza (1567-1611), drawing his ideas, apparently, 
from Giacomo Marzari's history of Vicenza, pub- 
lished in 1590, produced imaginary portraits of 
Caecina(the general of Vitellius), Cornelius Gallus 
(whom he supposed to be a Vicentine), and Q, 
Remmius Palaemon, the grammarian and master 
of Quintilian. Of these the last has survived 
[Plate I, i], and is interesting, if not for its 
artistic merits, at least as an example of the way in 
which these restorers of the antique went to work. 
The legend around the head, which for a good 
reason no one has fully explained, is taken directly 
from an inscription said to have been found at 
Vicenza. This inscription is included in all the 
old collections, from the fifteenth century onwards, 
and has earned at the hands of the Corpus of 
Latin inscriptions the title of ' a very old fraud ' — 
fraiis aniiqnissinia. The reverse is explained by a 
passage of Suetonius, who tells us that Palaemon, 
besides calling Varro a swine, and saying that 
literature had been born and would die with 
hiinself, claimed that Vergil had prophetically 
made mention of his name in the Eclogues as a 
future judge of all poets and poems. The medallist 
has, therefore, shown Palaemon judging between 
Menalcas and Damoetas, with the tag ' venit ecce 
Palaemon ' from the Third Eclogue. The head 
of Palaemon does not look like a purely imaginary 
head, nor like an attempt to reproduce a classical 
type of portrait, such as must have been familiar 
to the artist, and I venture to suggest that he has 
given us the portrait of some friend of his. 

Another variety of this medal is also in the British 
Museum. The bust on the obverse is slightly 
varied, and the inscription is merely AVGVS. 
PRECEPT. L. L. L. On the reverse is a tree 
with ivy growing round it, and the inscription 

But to return to Petrarch ; he himself tells us 
of the gems and gold and silver coins, sometimes 
damaged by the hoe, which vine-dressers would 
bring to him when he was at Rome, either offer- 
ing to sell them or asking him to identify the 
portraits carved thereon.' In a letter of 1355* he 
describes an audience granted to him by Charles 
IV at Mantua, when he carried out a long-cherished 
plan. He offered the emperor certain gold and 
silver coins with the effigies of the ancient emperors 
and their inscriptions written in tiny letters, among 
which was the living and breathing image of 
Caesar Augustus ; these he presented to him as 

-On this artist see Morsolin in ' Riv. Italiana di Numism.,' iv, 
173 ; V, 209. 
3 Ep. xviii, 8. 
* Ep. xix, 3 ; cp. 12. 


Qlassical Influence on the Italian Medal 

memorials of the persons whom he should remem- 
ber, to tread in their steps, to reproduee their 
personalities in his own. So, too, in 1433, Cyriac 
of Ancona went to meet Sigismund at Siena, on 
his way to be crowned emperor at Rome, and, 
handing him a gold coin of Trajan — evidently 
one of those alluding to his Dacian or Parthian 
victories — spoke to him of a crusade against the 
Turks.' Of Alfonso the Magnanimous, king of 
Naples, the historian" says that he collected the 
coins of the famous emperors, and of Caesar 
above all others, seeking with the greatest zeal to 
acquire them from all over Italy, and preserving 
them with almost religious care in an ivory 
cabinet. By which coins, he used to say, since 
other portraits of these men no longer existed, he 
was marvellously delighted and in a manner 
inflamed with a passion for virtue and glory. In 
his commentary on this passage, Aeneas Sylvius 
says that Alfonso told him at Puteoli that he had 
found a gold coin of Nero claiming to have closed 
the temple of Janus, and this most wise king 
condemned the foolish emperor for arrogating to 
himself a glory that did not belong to him. 

If one comes across a remark in this age about 
the artistic quality of the coins, it is extremely 
rare. Ambrogio Traversari, however, writing from 
Venice in 1433,' tells the collector, Nicolo Nicoli, 
about gold coins of Constantine and Constans — 
beautiful, indeed, but in no way equal in artistic 
value to one of Berenice which he had also seen. 
But the aesthetic or scientific point of view is the 
last to be reached in the history of collecting. 
Goethe's collection of Italian medals, now at 
Weimar, was made, along with his collection of 
portraits and autographs, with the object of 
bringing the great men of the past vividly before 

The ancient coin or medallion, then, not 
only made a special appeal to the Italian of the 
Renaissance, but was able to support that appeal 
by mere force of numbers. So that when Flavio 
Biondo, writing to Leonello d'Este in 1446, con- 
gratulated him on having placed his portrait and 
name on coins, after the fashion of the Roman 
emperors, the validity of the precedent must have 
been fully acknowledged by everyone at the time, 
even though they were not coins that Leonello 
had caused to be made, but personal medals, 
between which and the imperial world-currency 
of the Roman empire, authorized and guaranteed 
by the emperor's image and superscription, any 
comparison may now seem to us derisory. What- 
ever the origin of the Italian medal, it is clear that 
ancient coins must have exercised some influence 
on it. 

In dealing with classical influence it is often 

'^ Voigt, ' Wiederbelebung ', I, p. 275. 

"■ Beccadelli, ' De Dictis ct Factis Alph. Regis ', Lib. 11, 12. 

'Ep., Lib. viii, 48. 


difficult to say what was derived directly from 
anticjuities newly discovered, and what was rather 
due to tradition handed down through the middle 
ages and considerably modified or entirely recast — 
as we have seen in the portrait of Aristotle — in its 
long descent. It is obvious that certain medallions, 
known for convenience as the Due de Berry's 
medallions, represent some aspects of the tradition 
about the Roman emperors at the end of the 
middle ages. They, indeed, stand on the border- 
land between the middle ages and the Renaissance ; 
but while they herald the advent of Pisanello, they 
are also faintly reminiscent of the large medallions 
of the Roman age. Though medallions like the 
famous piece of Justinian, once in the French 
collection, but destroyed in the great burglary of 
i83i,*can never have been common, they were 
doubtless to some extent known. There is cer- 
tainly a reminiscence of some ancient medallion 
of this sort in one of the two pieces, similar to or 
modelled on medals once in the Due de Berry's 
collection, which have come down to us, and 
represent Constantine the Great and Heraclius. 
The duke possessed not only the original medals, 
but also copies which were specially made for him. 
The pieces which have come down to us are 
probably derived from these copies rather than 
from the originals ; at any rate, they seem to 
represent Flemish-Burgundian work of the end 
of the fourteenth century, although it is doubtful 
whether any of them are actually as old as that 
date. They show in many ways the influence of 
the seal-engraver's art ; still they are not made 
from engraved dies, but cast and chased. The 
duke's own specimens of the medals of Constantine 
and Heraclius were acquired before 1402. The 
actual pieces which we possess, together with the 
rather unusually careful description of the others 
in the duke's inventories, go to show that they 
belonged to a sort of set illustrating cardinal events 
in the history of Christianity. 

One could spend a long time following up the 
various clues of interest provided by the two 
extant medals, ° but they have so often been 
discussed elsewhere that they must be passed over 
here. For our present purpose, the interest of 
them lies in their transitional style ; in spite of 
their strongly mediaeval feeling, they point forward ; 
they are touched, however slightly, with the spirit 
of the early Renaissance. 

Now if these pieces, or their originals, were 
first made by Northern artists, they were widely 
copied, and became known in Italy. There is 
even some considerable probability that they were 
known to Pisanello. But before we proceed to 

^ Wroth, ' Brit. Mus. C.ital. of Iniperinl By?. Coins ', i, p. 25 
and frontispiece. 

"Tliey can best be studied in ]. von Sclilosser's .irticle, ' Die 
altesten Medaillen und die Antike ', in tlie Vienna ' Jalirbucli ', 
xviii (1897). For later literature see my note in 'Numism. 
Chron.', igio, pp. no ff, 

Qlassical Influence on the Italian Medal 

this point, we must glance very briefly at some 
other precursors of the Renaissance medal or coin. 

It is entirely in keeping with the character and 
policy of that astonishing genius, Frederick II, 
that he should have made an attempt to revive 
the classical style in his coinage. His gold 
Augustiiles [Plate I, 2] are directly inspired by 
the Roman aurei. Although the proportions of 
the bust and head suggest rather the aurei of the 
fourth century, the laureate head-dress and the 
reverse type seem rather to go back to some such 
emperor as Trajan [Plate II, 3]. A comparison 
of these coins with the miserable ordinary money 
of the time shows how far Frederick was in 
advance of his age. One other instance we have 
in the thirteenth century of an attempt to profit 
by ancient example ; that is at Ragusa, where the 
little copper coins with a head on the one side and 
a view of the city on the other [Plate II, 4J 
stand out curiously from the rest of the European 
coinage of the time. But these modest attempts 
failed hopelessly to influence the general current, 
or rather stagnation, of the art of coinage. We 
must come down to the end of the fourteenth 
century before we see any further signs of life. 

It has been remarked as significant that it was 
in Padua, the city where the traditions of classical 
learning were so strong, the city where Petrarch 
sojourned at the court of the Carrara, that these 
signs are found. There are even those who 
think the direct influence of Petrarch is to 
be seen in the medals which must next be 
mentioned ; but he died in 1374, whereas these 
pieces commemorate an event of 1390, and we 
have no right to suppose that they had any 
predecessors which might fall within his lifetime. 
However that may be, we have here medals 
struck with dies — not cast and chased, jeweller's 
fashion, like the medals of Constantine and 
Heraclius, nor like the true cast medals of the 
Renaissance, in which chasing was properly 
limited to clearing away accidental flaws. Further, 
the obverses of these medals of the two members 
ot the Carrara family (one is illustrated on Plate 
I, 5) are most distinctly inspired by Roman 
sestertii. Even the size of the original is adhered 
to. The reverse, however, is as old-fashioned as 
possible ; obviously no attempt has been made to 
improve on the ordinary moneyer's style. Nothing 
could illustrate better the struggle between classi- 
cal and Gothic influence. That the date inscribed 
on these little pieces, commemorating the capture 
of Carrara by Francesco II, is the date about 
which they were made, is proved by a description 
of one of them in the Due de Berry's inventories. 

These then, are the most remarkable among the 
precursors of the Renaissance medal proper. The 
Carrara pieces, like the coins of Frederick II, 
however, remained without influence on the 
development of the medal. Even in the purely 

external matter of technique they had no influence ; 
nearly all the medals worth consideration for the 
next hundred years are cast, not struck from dies. 
That is to saj^ the medallist makes his model in wax 
instead of sinking his design with the graver in a 
metal die. Obviously the wax process gave to the 
medallic art in its infancy just that freedom from 
the old traditions of die-engraving which was 
necessary for its healthy development. 

In 1438 the Emperor of Constantinople, John 
VIII Palaeologus, came to Italy to attend the 
Council of Ferrara, which had been summoned to 
consider the union of the Latin and Greek Churches. 
He arrived there on February 29th, and remained 
until January loth in the next year, when he 
moved with the rest of the Council to Florence. 
During this period the first true Renaissance medal 
was made. Is it not significant that its subject was 
the last of any note of that long line of Roman 
emperors, of which, during the the first few 
centuries of its sway, the series of medallion por- 
traits forms one of the most imposing memorials ? 
The emperor is represented travelling on horse- 
back ; a wayside cross reminds us of the nature of 
his mission. There is in this equestrian figure a 
vague reminiscence of the equestrian types of the 
earlier medallions ; possibly also of the mediaeval 
Constantine medal. There seems also to have been 
a second portrait of the emperor by Pisanello 
which represented on its reverse the Cross of 
Christ supported by two hands, indicating the 
Latin and Greek Churches. Such a type shows just 
that general reminiscence of the reverse of the 
Constantine medal with the Fountain of Life 
surmounted by the Cross and supported by two 
figures, for which we might look if the mediaeval 
piece in question were known to the artist. 
Pisanello's debt to his predecessors, whether 
mediaeval or antique, is always of this sort — a debt 
not of wholesale loan, but of suggestion and 
general stimulation only. That is, of course, true 
of every great creative artist. 

In his case we are able to get below the surface 
of his finished work, thanks to the existence of a 
large body of studies and sketches, contained 
especially in the famous Vallardi album in the 
Louvre. What do we find ? A large number of 
the drawings inspired by the antique which are 
attributed to him are, when critically examined, 
found not to be his. A certain number of the 
drawings are from ancient coins, and of all these 
not one has any sort of claim to be by Pisanello. 
There is a little signed study of the head of Faustina 
the elder, which is very likely his, but it is not 
treated in a medallic way, and is placed under a 
Gothic arch [Plate I, centre]. I should imagine 
that the drawing represents part of the design for 
the decoration of a library at the court of Mantua 
or Ferrara, with Roman busts in niches. On the 
same sheet, indeed, is a sketch of one of Pisanello's 


QJassical Infltdence on the Italian Medal 

patrons, Gianfiancesco Gonzaga.'" Considering^ 
wliat large numbers of Pisancllo's drawings, 
connected witli liis own medals as well as with other 
of his works, have come down to us, we should be 
justified in looking among them for some instances 
of the study of ancient coins, if he had ever made 
any. But there are none. And suggestions drawn 
from other remains of antiquity are scanty. One 
is to be found on the reverse of the noble portrait 
of the condottiere Niccolo Piccinino, made about 
1441. The scheme of the wolf and twins has been 
adapted for the Perugian she-griftin, who is suck- 
ling the two soldiers Braccio da Montone and his 
pupil, as the Roman she-wolf had suckled the sons 
of Mars. Take again the reverse of one of his latest 
medals, that of Don Inigo d'Avalos. As on the 
shield of Achilles, the artist has wrought ' the 
earth and the heaven and the sea, and also two 
fair cities of mortal men.' Lacking the poet's 
licence, he has been unable to combine 'the untiring 
sun' with 'the waxing moon, and all the signs 
that make the crown of heaven ' ; so he has con- 
tented himself with the last. 

There is hardly need for me to reassert what 
probably every critic of the artist now admits — 
that the famous design of the eagle and other 
birds of prey on the medal of Alfonso of Aragon 
owes nothing to the type of an ancient coin of 
Agrigentum representing two eagles on a hare. 
As I have said, the coins specially collected at this 
time were coins representing famous persons of 
antiquity, and it is to be doubted whether coins of 
the Agrigentine kind would have bulked largely in 
any collection so early in the fifteenth century. 
In any case, Pisanello's own studies in the 
menageries of his time and his own powers of 
composition will amply account for the success of 
this superb design, so far as the subject-matter is 

We must regret the loss of the wedding present 
which Pisanello sent to his patron, Leonello 
d'Este, in 1435 — ^ portrait of Julius Caesar. It 
would tell us more than pages of conjecture what 
was his attitude towards ancient art. But we may 
be sure that, even if in this portrait he attempted a 
faithful reproduction of the antique, it was less 
because he was content with mere imitation, than 
out of deference to the tastes of his patron ; for 
Caesar was Leonello's favourite among the 

Gabriele d'Annunzio has described Pisanello 
as not only one among the greatest stylists that 
have appeared in the world, but also ' I'anima piii 
schiettamente ellenica di tutto il Rinascimento ' ; 
and he is hardly overstating the case. But the 
medallist, like the sculptor Jacopo della Querela, 
who has an equal, if not a stronger, natural affinity 

'" This, I now think, is the certain identification, though 
formerly (' Pisanello ', pp. 105 f.) I insisted that a similar sketch 
represented Niccolo III d'Este, 


with the Greeks, owes nothing to that faculty or 
inclination for mere imitation of tlie older model, 
which is invariably a sign of poverty of conception. 
And what is (rue of him is true in a sense of all 
the other medallists ; as a rule, il is the poorer 
artists who resort to mere imitation, but the greater 
men use it for such portions of their work as interest 
them least. A striking instance of this fact is afforded 
by the medals of the Florentine school which are 
associated with the name of Niccolo Spinelli. There 
is, apart from the work of the incomparable 
founder of the art, no series of medallic portraits 
approaching in excellence those produced by this 
artist and his school. But the reverse designs on 
this same series are, it is no exaggeration to say, 
with few exceptions, poor in conception as in 
execution, and quite a number of them are taken 
bodily from the antique. The group of the three 
Graces, found at Roine about 1460, and now at 
Siena, and the gem with Diomedes holding the 
Palladium, copied by Donatello in one of the 
medallions of the Riccardi Palace, both furnished 
reverse types. A curious instance is the ' lifting ' 
of the four horses from the cameo by Atheni on 
[Plate I, 8] of Jupiter fighting the giants, now at 
Naples, to do service in a triumphal car on the 
medal, cast in 1492, of the youthful Alfonso d'Este 
[Plate I, 11]. This cameo has been traced back 
to the collection of Fulvio Orsini ; before his time 
(he was born in 1529 and died in 1600) it was 
perhaps in some Florentine cabinet. Undoubtedly 
the Medici collections must have had their effect on 
the Medici artists. There is a little medal of Lorenzo 
de' Medici [Plate I, 7], closely allied in style to 
the medal commemorating the Pazzi conspiracy, 
and therefore not unreasonably to be regarded as 
the work of Bertoldo di Giovanni or one of his 
pupils. Whatever his merits as a sculptor and 
bronze-caster, Bertoldo's skill in the medallic art is 
limited ; and I do not think that even the reverse 
of this medal of Lorenzo, copied with small 
understanding from a Roman coin of Trajan 
[Plate I, 6], is too bad for him. The interest of 
the medal lies in its following its original, which 
was doubtless in the Medici cabinet, so very 
closely, not merely in subject, but in size, just as 
the Carrara medals reproduced the general appear- 
ance of their Roman originals. But whether the 
artist had the least idea of the significance of his 
model, we may doubt, although we cannot be 
sure either way until someone has explained the 
meaningof the legend AGITIS IN FATVM. 

The same tendency to inake medals of 
approximately the same size and general appear- 
ance as the Roman sestertii is perceptible in the 
series of pieces associated with the Pope, Paul 
II." Both the medals produced during his 
cardinalate, and still more the series of small 

A'- This Pope's medals are discussed in detail in a paper in 
the ' Numism. Chronicle ' for 1910. 




*- VMr ' '-^'^ ^ ■ ■ >> V V >. ■-- ^ i i II I 




• -■-- 





y " ' - ;'-r y 


V ' •~.l 







Pl.ATlC U 

Qlassical Influence on the Italian Medal 

pieces issued during his tenure of the papal see, 
follow the ancient model. Paul was, as we know, 
an enthusiastic collector of coins, ancient and 
modern. We have an inventory — very full, as 
inventories of the time go — of his collection. One 
of his biographers gives an artless account of the 
skill which he showed in numismatics. He was, 
says Canensius, a most accurate investigator of all 
kinds of antiquities, and so good at distinguishing 
the portraits of the emperors on coins of gold or 
other metals, that he was able to tell the name of 
an emperor at the first glance ; he had likewise a 
most tenacious memory of the emperors and 
popes. Evidently just the kind of man to be at 
the head of a coin-cabinet, if not of Christendom. 
He was particularly fond of burying his medals — 
many of which bear the inscription : HAS AEDES 
CONDIDIT, and a date— in the foundations of 
his buildings, such as the Palazzo di San Marco 
in Rome, where they have since been discovered. 
The historian Platina, who did not love the Pope, 
who dismissed him from a comfortable post, has 
a curious, if pedantic, remark about this practice. 
' He used,' he says, ' after the ancient custom, to 
deposit an almost infinite number of coins of 
gold, silver or bronze bearing his portrait, sine iillo 
seiiatiis consulto, in the foundations of his build- 
ings, herein imitating the ancients rather than 
Peter, Anacletus and Linus.' It would almost 
appear that, had the Pope professed to make his 
medals with the consent of the sacred college, and 
placed on them, like the Roman emperors, the 
letters S. C, his offence would have seemed less 
in the eyes of his biographer. One only of Paul's 
medals bears a type directly copied from a Roman 
coin ; that is the Hilaritas Pitblica [Plate I, lo], 
modelled on Hadrian's coin with Hilaritas P.K. 
[Plate I, 9]. It is similar in style to another 
reverse with a half Roman-sounding legend, 
Letitia Scholastica. This is signed by the medallist 
Aristotile da Bologna, who may, therefore, have 
done the Hilaritas medal as well. But most of 
the medals of Paul were probably made by two 
other artists, Andrea da Viterbo and Cristoforo 
Geremia of Mantua. Cristoforo, an artist of no 
very great powers, was immensely impressed by 
the remains of antiquity which he saw around 
him. His medal of the man who employed him 
for some years before he entered the service of 
the Pope in 1465, Cardinal Lodovico Scarampi 
[Plate II, i], has a reverse which might have 
been — was, for all I know — copied directly from, 
not a Roman coin, but a Roman relief. He also 
made a fancy portrait of Augustus [Plate II, 2], 
which is interesting in its artless attempt to repro- 
duce the antique. The resemblance to the portrait 
of Augustus is not too close. The inscription is an 
unintelligent adaptation from Roman coins. On 
the reverse we have a Concordia group, of 
Augustus and the Empress Livia (not, as she has 

been called. Abundance), with the letters S.C. so 
much desired of Plalina. A similar Concordia 
group, with an inscription betraying a very rudi- 
mentary acquaintance with Latin grammar and 
prosody, is found in the quaint medal of the 
Venetian doge Pasquale Malipieri (1457-62), by 
Marco Guidizani.^- Other Venetian artists seem 
to betray, in their parade of sympathies with the 
antique, the influence of neighbouring Padua: 
most remarkable among them is Giovanni Boldu, 
who copies the head of the young Caracalla on a 
large scale, or signs his name in Greek and 
Hebrew as well as Latin. 

It would be easy to multiply instances of this 
kind. The more sophisticated imitators of the 
ancient style must not, however, be forgotten, 
although their productions lack the quaintness 
which makes the work of the others attractive. 
Alessandro Cesati, who worked in Rome for more 
than twenty years under Paul III, Julius III, 
Pius IV and Paul IV, had an enormous repu- 
tation. A medal of Paul III, with Alexander 
the Great kneeling before the high-priest of the 
Jews on the reverse [Plate II, 7], is said by 
Vasari to have excited from Michelangelo the 
exclamation that it represented the acme of 
artistic achievement. This is probably one of 
the 'molte novelle et infinite bugie ' with which 
Vasari, as a contemporary and accomplice 
tells us," filled his biographies; for the medal 
strikes the modern eye as a singularly frigid and 
insipid production. But that the medallist had 
some considerable superficial skill in modelling is 
clear from bis rendering of the type of Securitas 
[Plate II, 3], which is copied from a Roman 
original ; though the forms lack precision, they are 
rendered with a suppleness of which the Roman 
die-engraver was quite incapable. 

The specimen of this Securitas by Cesati which 
is shown in the plate is not the one attached to the 
portrait of Pope Paul III, but another which 
appears as the reverse of a fancy medal of Octavian 
[Plate II, 3]. Since it was the commonest thing 
in the world to join together the obverse of a 
medal by one artist, with the reverse of a medal 
by another, we cannot be sure that this head of 
Octavian is by Cesati. But there is plausibility in 
the attribution, which is due to Dr. Parkes Weber." 
The delicacy and yet dullness of the forms, the 
lack of precision in modelling, anj not un- 
characteristic of Cesati. The same qualities are 
seen in a set of medals to which I have already 
alluded, professing to represent Priam, Artemisia 
and Dido [Pl.\te II, 5, 6, 8]. The Priam has 
already been attributed to Cesati by Dr. Parkes 
Weber. All three present on the reverse views 
of the cities or monuments with which these 

'■■^ Burlington Magazine. Dec, 1907, p. 148, T'l. 1 1 1, 2. 
^^ Don Miniato Pitti ; see Gaye, ' Carteggio ', i, 150, note. 
!■" Numism. Chron.', 1897, pp. 314^- 



Qhusical Ififlutuce on the Italian Medal 

persons are connected. The medal of Artemisia 
has long been known as showing one of the 
earliest attempts at restoring the Mausoleum. To 
these mav be added, with great probability, a 
medal of Alexander the Great [Plate II, 4] (the 
attribution is again due to Dr. Parkes Weber). 
Very strong is the inspiration of Roman historical 
relief in the reverse, which represents Alexander the 
Great riding through a triumphal arch in a quad- 
riga of elephants, with the legend IIEPSIS A AfiGEISA. 
The obverse, on the other hand, is copied from a 
gold staler of Alexander the Great, and the artist, 
like many another after him, has taken the head of 
the goddess Athena for a portrait of the king. To 
make everything quite clear and satisfactory he has 
described the head in a queer Graeco-Latin lingo as 

Whatever may be the right attribution of these 
medals, the portrait of Octavian [Plate II, 3] 
may instructively be compared with two others 
representing the same person. It bears but slight 
resemblance in its conception to any real portrait 
of the emperor. The larger cast medal [Plate II, 
11], without inscription, is, on the other hand, a 
fine work, very closely, but not slavishly, copied 
from some antique, and entirely free from the 
pettiness of style which is apt to result from such 
imitation. It probably dates from about 1500; 
Mr. Keary, indeed, attributed it to Riccio, and we 
may at least be assured that it is North Italian 
work, if not definitely Paduan.'^ It is, however, 
very different from the later imitations [Pl.\te II, 
9] which come from the hand of the Paduan, 
Giovanni Cavino (c 1500-1570). These are struck 
from dies, engraved, as a rule, with deliberate 
intent to deceive ; though whether Cavino was a 
nefarious forger, like Karl Wilhelm Becker, rather 
than a well-meaning scholar of misplaced inge- 
nuity, it is difficult at this time to make out. It is 
said that he was assisted in designing his imitations 
by the Paduan scholar and antiquary, Alessandro 
Bassiano. Ap.irt from certain slight differences 
in technique, due to the use of different graving 
instruments and different methods of striking, the 
' Paduans,' as collectors call them, are almost 
indistinguishable from original Roman coins. 
Fortunately, a great number of Cavino's own dies 
have been preserved, so that some control is 
possible. Cavino was, of coui^se, only the most 
notorious of these mischievous craftsmen. Vasari, 
e.g., mentions Lodovico, the son of II Marmita, 
who worked in Rome in the first half of the 
sixteenth century, a great master of the art of 
counterfeiting antique coins, from which he 
reaped great profit. This, however, is a matter 
hardly germane to the present subject, for this 
sort of imitation has been practised at all times, 
and at none with more success than in the 
present day. 

"On it seeais to be based the fancy head of Diocletian 
illustrated by Courajod (0/. cit. p, 16). 


The inference from the examples of antique in- 
fluence here collected is fairly obvious ; at any 
rate, it is neither new nor startling ; it is indeed no 
other than can be drawn from the study of the re- 
lations between any one school of art and an 
earlier school to which directly or indirectly it 
owes its origin. Imitation of earlier models, when 
carried beyond the merely educational stage, is as 
fatal to sincerity and directness of vision, as is the 
anarchical rejection of the lessons that they teach ; 
the greater minds speedily shake off, the smaller 
are apt to be crushed by, the weight of the examples 
laid upon them. While a school of art had the 
root of the matter in it, as the early Italian school 
of medallists had, little harm could be done ; but 
as soon as the real thing began to be replaced by 
a more or less academic tradition, the classical 
influence was too strong, and showed itself in the 
form of affectation and insincerity. Medals, it is 
true, might always be partially redeemed by the 
fact that, after all, they were usually portraits of 
contemporaries. It is where the Italian artists get 
away from the interest of individual portraiture 
and personality that we see the influence of the 
antique at its worst, because the minor Italian artists 
were seldom able to supply worthy subject-matter 
of their own for treatment in this style, and de- 
pended entirely for the content of their art on 
what they could draw from a dead past. But 
fortunately the Italian medallists had, so to speak, 
a long start before they were caught up again by 
the antique. And their sound common-sense 
helped them. Nowadays, when an artist receives 
a commission to design a new coinage or to make 
a medal, he is frequently advised to go and look 
at the Greek coins or Italian medals in the British 
Museum. If he has any sense, he says to himself: 
' These are very beautiful, and doubtless were 
suitable for their lime and purpose, but all they can 
teach me is that I must make something beautiful 
and also suitable to my time and my purpose, which 
are different.' That was what the Italian coin- 
engraver told himself ; and instead of reproducing 
the style of Greek or Roman coins, he set to work 
to modify the designs of his mediaeval predecessors, 
while profiting by his increased technical know- 
ledge and recently acquired power of portraiture. 
The result is seen in the Italian festoons (such as 
those of Giovanni II Bentivoglio or Giangaleazzo 
Maria Sforza, illustrated on Plate II, 10, 12), with 
their characteristic portrait-heads, their allegorical 
or heraldic reverse designs, all in sharp but delicate 
low relief — coins that could be stacked and packed, 
coins suited at once to the artistic tastes and to 
the commercial instincts of the people for whom 
they were made, coins that are a standing proof of 
the fact that commerce and art are not necessarily 

This article represents, with certain omissions, a lecture 
delivered at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, in Michaelmas 
Term, igio. 





HE famous series of portrait 
drawings, representing per- 
sonages of the court of King 
Henry VIII, by Hans Hol- 
bein the younger, is too well 
known to need description 
here. In this case, as in 

_ practically every important 

matter in the history of art, something is always 
turning up which prevents even such a question 
as these Holbein drawings from being relegated 
to the domain of choses jiigees. 

The history of this precious volume deserves to 
be re-told as shortly as possible. It contains 
portrait drawings up to the last year of Holbein's 
life, 1543, as shown by the portraits of Edward, 
Prince of Wales, in whose possession, when 
Edward VI, it certainly was, as appears from the 
entry of the Inventory of Lord Lumley's pictures 
in 1590, where it is described thus : — 

' A greate booke of Pictures doone by Haunce 
Holbyne of certeyne Lordes, Ladyes, Gentlemen 
and Gentlewomen in King Henry the 8 : his tyme, 
their names subscribed by S' John Cheke, 
Secretary to King Edward the 6 w* booke was 
King Edward the 6.' 

It"^ is this important entry which tells us that 
Edward VI's tutor, Sir John Cheke, was the author- 
ity for the names written on the drawings, several 
of which are known for certain to be incorrect. 
Lord Lnmley probably inherited this volume of 
drawings with other pictures and works of art 
from his father-in-law, Henry FitzAlan, Earl of 
Arundel, to whom Edward VI seems to have sold 
or given a great deal of such property. Lord 
Lumley died in 1609, and a great part of his library 
passed into the possession of Henry, Prince of 
Wales, the book of drawings by Holbein being 
probably included. It was at all events in the pos- 
session of Charles I at his accession, for the King 
exchanged the book with Philip, Earl of Pembroke 
and Montgomery, then Lord Chamberlain, for the 
little painting of S^. George by Raphael. The Lord 
Chamberlain at once presented the book to 
Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel, the great 
collector. Thestatement that the book of drawings 
had found its way to France, and was bought by 
King Charles I from M. de Lyencourt seems to be 
based on a confusion between this book of 
Holbein drawings and a similar volume of draw- 
ings of the French school, some album similar to 
those recently described in The Burlington 
Magazine by M. Dimier.' Both volumes are 
described distinctly in Van der Doort's catalogue 
of King Charles I's collection. 

1 ' French Portrait Drawings at Knovvsley,' by Louis Dimier, 
p. 162-168 (December, 1910). 

We next hear of the book from two manuscripts 
on the history of miniature painting. In the first, 
preserved in the British Museum (Harl. MSS, 
6,000), the author, in describing the working in 
crayons, quotes the book of Holbein drawings, and 
says : — ' I speak and knowe of many of them to be 
miserably spoyled by the injury of tyme, and the 
ignorance of some who had formerly the keepinge 
of the booke, yet all find in these ruinous remaines 
an admirable hand, and a rare manner of working 
in few lines, and no labour in expressing of the 
life and likenesses, many times equal to his own 
and excelling other men's oyl-pictures. The booke 
hath been long a wanderer ; but is now happily 
fallen into the hands of my noble Lord the Earl 
Marshal of England, a most eminent patron to 
all painters who understood the arts ; and who 
therefore preserved this book with his life, till both 
were lost together.' A somewhat similar notice is 
given by Edward Norgate, the herald-painter, in a • 
manuscript essay on miniature painting in the 
Bodleian Library (Rawlinson MSS, No. 336), 
where treating of crayons he says : — ' A better way 
was used by Holbein, by priming a large paper 
with a carnation or complexion of flesh colour, 
whereby he made pictures by the life, of many 
great lords and ladies of his time, with black and 
red chalke, with other flesh colours, made up hard 
and dry, like small pencil sticks. Of this kind was 
an excellent booke, while it remained in the hands 
of the most noble Earl of Arundel and Surrey. 
But I heare it has been a great traveller, and 
wherever now, he hath got his errata, or (which is 
as good) hath met with an index expurgatorius, 
and is made worse with mending.' 

Both the notices were written after the Earl of 
Arundel's death, in 1646, and probably Norgate's 
essay is the editio princeps of this stage of the 
book's history. The wanderings alluded to are 
easily accounted for, as from 1642 until his death 
in 1646 Arundel was a voluntary exile on the 
Continent with his countess, and they removed all 
their pictures and works of art to the Continent. 
After her husband's death the Countess of Arundel 
continued to reside at various places on the 
Continent, accompanied by her collections, until 
her own death at Amsterdam in 1655. Litigation 
then ensued between her sons as to the disposal 
of her property. A good part of the valuable 
Arundel Collection was disposed of in Holland by 
the Countess's younger son. Lord Stafford, but a 
considerable part eventually returned to the family 
of the Duke of Norfolk in England. A tradition, 
which there is no need to discredit, states that at a 
sale of theeffectsof Henry,Uukeof Norfolk, in 1686, 
the book of Holbein drawings was purchased for 
the Crown. The story is well known how Queen 


On a T^ortrait ^ra^yhjg by Hans Holbein the Younger 

Caroline, shortly after the accession of George 11, 
found in a bureau at Kensington the forgotten 
book of drawings. She had them removed from 
the book — an unlucky step — mounted, framed and 
glazed, and hung first in the palace at Richmond, 
and later at Kensington Palace. George Vertue 
undertook to engrave them, and traced off about 
thirty-five portraits on oil-paper, which passed 
into the possession of Horace Watpole. The 
scheme was not, however, carried out until the 
reign of George III; then they were taken down, 
arranged in portfolios, and the well-known series of 
engravings by J. Chamberlaine was issued. Since 
then thedrawings have remained atWindsorCastle. 
It will be seen that the book has passed through 
very few hands, and that while in Arundel's pos- 
session the drawings were in a bad state, and had 
suffered injury by unskilful retouching. This is 
very evident in the drawings at Windsor Castle, 
but it requires a very expert eye to determine what 
retouches may, or may not, have been made by 
Holbein himself. It is very probable that the 
drawings were refreshed by outlines very soon 
after Holbein's death, if not by the painter himself. 
Since that date the most likely time for them to 
have sufifered any alteration would have been after 
their re-discovery at Kensington, when they were 
for a time in the hands of George Vertue, an 
e.xpert crayon-artist himself as well as engraver. 
Very few drawings by Holbein of this description 

exist outside the Windsor collection. A few exist 
in actual duplicate, such as the portrait of Bishop 
P'isher in the British Museum, and that said 
to be the Duchess of Suffolk. Another such 
duplicate is in the collection of Sir John Leslie, 
Bart. It is identical with the portrait drawing 
at Windsor, named tentatively as Sir Charles 
Wingfield. At first sight the Leslie drawing 
appears as good, even in some parts better than 
the Windsor portrait. The paper on which it 
is executed seems to be contemporary, and the 
Leslie drawing itself is quite worthy of Holbein's 
pencil. A careful comparison of the two drawings 
side by side [see Plate] reveals, however, that 
there are certain differences in the Leslie drawing, 
chiefly in such small details as the drawing of the 
eyelashes, the eyes themselves, the line of the 
cheek-bone, the treatment of the hair, the hairs of 
the beard, which have been added with a pen or a 
pointed brush, all of which seem to convey con- 
viction that the Leslie drawing is a later version 
of that at Windsor. An exhaustive study of the 
Windsor drawings with their variants and dupli- 
cates is in course of preparation by Prof. Dr. Paul 
Ganz, of the Basle Museum, in which the question 
of the two portraits of Wingfield will doubtless 
be discussed with great authority. In the mean- 
time we have to thank Sir John Leslie for kindly 
permitting us to reproduce his interesting drawing 
for reproduction and discussion. 


MONG the drawings left by 
great artists one constantly 
comes upon analytical sketches 
of the works of other masters, 
the purpose of which is evi- 
dently to discover the principles 
of effect by which the emotion 
is conveyed. 
Such analytical study of the composition and 
construction of works of art, besides being very 
instructive, is very interesting, and often leads to 
very curious discoveries. 

One day, as I was making a sketch of the 
Parthenon frieze, seeking for the rhythm by 
drawing only such spots and accents as caught 
my eye, I was surprised to notice upon my paper 
the definite suggestion of the large line of a horse's 
back from head to tail, running over and binding 
together a number of men and horses. 

Was this intentional on the artist's part, or is it 
the case that a group of horses is, if very truly 
given, necessarily ' horsey ' in its principle ? 

Immediately afterwards I was arrested by the 
same question of intention, in a similar but much 


more definite instance — that of the bird-form in 
the great Victory of Saiiwtlivace in the Louvre. 

I will ask the reader to look at the illustration 
[Plate, a], and decide for himself if the bird's 
tail was added only as a mass of balancing drapery 
or consciously as the tail fitted to the wings,' for 
to deny that the mass of drapery behind the figure 
is a bird's tail is impossible. 

Wings in art are too often only dead symbols, 
mere references to the meaning of their original 
use, by which art tried to show the aetherial 
quality of angels and other unearthly beings. 
But here we have the living symbol, the bird 
quality made visible, which gives to the great solid 
figure its buoyancy. 

My next illustration [PLATE, b], which is from 
a colour print by Hokusai, is an example very 
similar to the last, in the fish-form which controls 
the drawing. 

Fishes are of the water and formed by it, and 
what more likely than that the long lines with 

1 Lest this appearance may be challenged on the ground of 
restoration, let me say that the parts involved are all parts of 
the original hgure. 









which Hokusai has expressed the swell should 
recall the general lines of a fish ? Yes ; but that 
is not all, for see how the head is made by the 
bridge, and the chin shaped by the line of the roof, 
and how the distinct suggestion of the eye and 
mouth complete the impression, just as evidently 
as in the bird form in the Victory. 

Are these 'allusions' to the natural form 
intentional ; or has the artist been led unconsciously 
to control his work, in each of these instances, into 
that form in nature which is the visible type of 
the feeling that he wishes to express ? 

There is among the Leonardo da Vinci MSS. 
at Windsor a sheet of sketches which is very 
suggestive in this connexion, for on it he illus- 
trates the similarities between the movement of 
water and the growth and flow of woman's hair. 

His mental processes were very conscious, and 
we watch him here employing his wide generaliza- 
tions, not to probe the riddle of the universe, but 
deliberately for artistic expression. 

When we speak of ' flowing hair ' we make the 
same comparison. In speech, indeed, instances 
abound to show the universal recognition of the 
effectiveness of such allusions. 

In poetry examples of appeal to the ear will 
readily occur, as in this very simple instance : — 

' I galloped, Dirck galloped, we galloped all 

where the allusion to the rhythm of the horses' 
feet is evidently intentional and conscious. 

There is, however, a very widespread opinion 
that real art is entirely instinctive, which will oppose 
the view that it can be so conscious in its processes 
as these instances suggest. Yet the evidence upon 
the point to be found in the writings and practice 
of great artists is very conclusive. 

Surely this opinion is partly wrong in that it 
fails to distinguish between the origin of ideas or 
inspiration and the methods of expression such 
as composition, selection, and execution. For 
while the former is spontaneous and intuitive, the 
latter are deliberate and conscious. Even 
Velazquez's facility of execution is like the ease 
with which we read and write, only the result of 
infinite conscious practice. 

Reynolds tells us how for his instruction it was 
his habit to make sketches of all pictures that 
struck him by their light and shade, without any 
indication of their subject. And such analytical 
sketches of the line, colour, or light and shade 
patterns of pictures, too rough even to show if 
they were taken from figures, landscape or still 
life, will yet give us a sense of solemnity from a 
Rembrandt, of gaiety from a Watteau, of terror 
from Goya's etchings of the Horrors of War. For 
they give us the ' abstract ' effect upon which their 
emotional appeal through the eye essentially de- 
pends, without which all minor perfections must fail 

Studies in (Composition 

to make upon us any strong or lasting impression. 
Great masters seem to think in such abstract 
artistic terms, which are as far from the literal 
imitation of objects, as is architecture itself, and 
which thus bring the highest manifestations of 
painting and sculpture into true line with music, 
the purest and least imitative of all the arts. 

The writings and the recorded sayings of great 
artists all show a constant preoccupation with 
the study of what may be called the ' science of 
effect,' and bear witness to their untiring analysis 
of the works of others. 

There is given in the ' Life of Sir John Millais 
by his son, a letter of Browning's which expresses 
admirably the importance of such study and the 
right manner of it. It is a letter of advice upon 
the work of a young poet, and in it he tells him 
to ' study the secret of the effectiveness of what- 
ever poetry does affect him— not repeating or 
copying those effects — but finding out, I mean, 
why they prove to be effects, and so learning to 
become similarly effective.' 

And it is in this spirit that great masters appear 
to work, endeavouring always to find out how and 
why both nature and art in their moments of 
poetry are effective. 

It is indeed just this fundamental study of the 
principles of art that links all great masters with 
tradition, however new and wayward their work 
may seem upon its first appearance. For the real 
mastery of principles is the direct antithesis of the 
'repeating and copying of effects,' the radical 
error in all routine and ' academic ' teaching, which 
insists upon the letter and misses the spirit of the 
very masters whose influence it wishes to extend. 
Here, indeed, lies the fundamental difference 
between the real artist and the mere picture-maker, 
however brilliant he may be. For the latter 
accepts the ' rules ' of successful practice, which 
must often cramp the freedom of his inspiration, 
and compel him to seek consciously for subjects 
that will submit to them ; while the former accepts 
the ideas and impressions which come naturally to 
him, and is conscious only in his search for the 
means that will best serve for their expression, 
brushing aside all rules and precedents, however 
great, that interfere with this. 

Is it not this that Millet meant when he denied 
the existence of 'rules of composition ', in a letter 
in which he writes :' ... for years I have held 
the conviction that composition is merely a means 
of communicating to others our own feelings and 
ideas as forcibly as possible ; and furthermore that 
an idea will discover for itself the best means for 
its expression ' ? 

In true art all is for the expression of the artist's 
emotion. Consequently the complete artist needs 
a mastery of principles of effect, that he may be 
able to apply them in the service of his own 
inspiration. He must even experiment in new 


Studies in Composition 

effects at tlie call of new ideas. Is it not possible 
that in his need he is led to use intentionally forms 
such as I have illustrated ? Not, of course, to 
make an ingenious picture of a fish or a bird, but 
to heighten the effect of his design upon the 
spectator through association with such forms, 
whose influcnce'should be felt, while their presence 
is not detected. 

Among other very interesting examples of ex- 
pressive composition, conscious or unconscious, is 
a drawing by Millet called Lcs Premiers P^7S [Plate. 
c]. The motive of the composition is the invitation 
of the father's wide open arms. The eye is led 
directly by centralizing them to the father's hands, 
but the arms, seen as they are in perspective, 
hardly express his purpose with sufficient clear- 
ness, and Millet has reinforced them by repeating 
the same movement in the vertical plane, in the 
gaping angle made by the spade at the father's 
feet, and the broom that leans against the 
wheelbarrow behind him. Stop these two 
lines out, and see how the drawing loses in 

In Degas' Dansense in the Luxembourg Gallery 
the distinct suggestion of the wings made by the 
shape of the scenery that rises from behind her 
shoulders is used to contribute to the airy poise of 
the figure. 

In colour you will find instances that suggest the 
use of the same principle, of which Couture gives 
as a hint when he points out how the flesh of 
Correggio's /J////o/)t', set by the blue mantle, recalls 
the blue setting of the golden flame so noticeable 
in a burning candle. Besnard has used the 
same scheme in his Fcntnic se chanffant in the 

It is not among artists such as Courbet or 
Manet that we shall find examples of such com- 
position. Theirs was a different art ; but among 
artists of more dramatic conception such as Diirer, 
Millet, Goya, Rembrandt. 

There is a drawing of the last-named at Berlin of 
n Descent front the Cross, in which the angles of the 
crosses and the ladders make a series of descend- 
ing spokes, which by their falling increase the 


OST of the authorities on 
Greek and Roman life state 
that the art of pattern-weav- 
ing had reached a high state 
of mechanical perfection in 
ancient times, and that much 
of the modern mechanism 

^^^ _ ^of the loom was then in use. 

For instance, the writers of the article ' Tela ' in 
Smith's 'Dictionary of Greek and Roman Anti- 


sentiment of dead weight in Christ's body. In 
his etching of T//e Raisinti of Lazarns the power 
of Christ's hand to raise him from the dead is 
emphasized by the gesture being carried right 
across to a point above the head of Lazarus, 
through the trail of ivy and the forms upon the 
rock, subtly but yet so definitely as to make its 

And Millet's work will repay much study in 
attempting to discover ' how and why he is 

To take the first examples to hand, see in his 
Noon reproduced in Mr. Clausen's ' Six Lectures 
Upon Art,' how the figures and sheaves all lie upon 
the ground in one great, tired, heavy shape. 

In his Dcrgcre'-, notice how much the quiet of 
the scene depends not only upon the placing of 
the upright shepherdess against the long flat line 
of the grazing flock, but on the sheep being 
repeated by their shadows, which fall towards us, 
and by the upper half of the figure against the 
sky, being repeated by her legs below the flock, 
recalling the sensation of stillness associated with 
unbroken reflections in water. 

How far the construction of the effects in any 
work may be conscious and deliberate, it must 
always be hard to determine ; for after much 
experience an artist throws his idea into its best 
form with such rapidity as to hide all sense of 
the labour and struggle on which such power is 
built up. 

Of course all knowledge and conscious employ- 
ment of principles must humbly serve the artist's 
inspiration, and never become evident on their 
own account. 

For is it not the first essential in all true art, 
which is the ' language of feeling,' that before all 
other gifts and qualifications an artist ' must be 
moved himself if he is to move others ' ? Which is 
to say, that he must accept simply and contentedly 
the ideas that come naturally to him, and never 
strain after the ideas that belong to others. ' I 
prayGodevery day,' said Corot in this connexion, 
'to make me as a little child '. 

-Recently bequeathed by Mr. Cliauchard to the Louvre. 


quities ' (3rd ed., 1890) conclude that the Greek 
loom must have been fitted with an elaborate 
system of leashes (or ' heddles ') for working out 
designs mechanically. ' For great complexity of 
pattern,' they write, ' a great variety of leashes 
were used. The details of this part of the subject 
can be best studied in modern weaving. The 
principles of weaving the patterns are really 
exactly the same in the loom of to-day, etc. 
This conclusion is based on the learned authors' 

The Technique of Greek and T^man Weaving 

misunderstanding of the first principles of simple 
weaving and their low estimate of the textile 
artist's powers. It requires violent and unnecessary 
hypotheses quite unwarranted by the evidence 
which has come down to us. All the specimens 
of ancient Greek and Roman textiles, even the 
most elaborate, of which we have any knowledge 
from whatever sources, could have been produced 
by skilled weavers on the simplest form of loom, 
while we have no evidence that any other form of 
loom existed at the times and places which 
produced those specimens.' 

Indeed the skill and imagination of the textile 
ai-tist— as of all others— is thwarted and impared 
by almost every invention which increases the 
speedand uniformity of production. Consequently 
the numerous descriptions of textiles in Greek and 
Latin literature all go to prove that the weavers 
had happily not attained to the disadvantage of 
being able to repeat designs in the modern manner 
by means of machinery of deadly accuracy, for 
the spontaneously varied ornament described 
could not have been woven by means of the 
machines which now eliminate all life and spirit 
from the most artistic design. 

There is not the least doubt that a great deal of 
weaving was done in ancient Greece and Rome, 
in common with all other countries of antiquity, 
The works of the classic writers teem with refer- 
ences to the weaver. The swiftness of his shuttle, 
the strength and weight of his beam or roller, the 
tightly stretched warp and its intersecting weft or 
woof, the preparation of the thread and the dressing 
of the finished web, as well as the pleasant and 
monotonous sounds accompanying the various 
operations of the work, have always appealed to 
the poet's fancy, even when the weaver was only 
engaged in making webs for common use. But 

' Lest I seem to controvert classical scholarship lightly, and 
not to weary laymen, I add some notes in reference to t!ie 
article 'Tela' : (i) No examples of automatic pattern-weaving 
are known ever to have existed. (2) The description of fancy 
weaving (p. 767) is quite impracticable, and there is no evidence 
that such a method was ever tried. (3) Patterns have not 
always been made by passing over a given number of warp, 
threads ; that is a comparatively modern method. (4) ' A great 
many sets of leashes' on upright looms — and the learned 
authors rightly reject (p. 768, middle of second column) the 
theory that hoiizontal looms ever existed among the Greeks or 
Romans— are impossible ; several sets could not be used to any 
effect ; even one set would be difficult to manage on a Greek 
loom, though easier on an Egyptian. (5) As to the leash-rod, it 
may refer to the rod for keeping the cross in the warp, for this 
is a necessity even of the simplest loo.n. (6) ' Such a method, 
of course, only admits of plain we.iving without a pattern,' etc. 
To the weaver this really is nonsense. How could the authors 
account for the E:; tapestry, for instance, repro- 
duced here [Plate, b] ? (7) The webs called respectively 
SlfUTOs ( ilix), rplfiiTos (trUix) and ttoXv/iItos could — so far as the 
authors of 'Tela' describe them— be produced quite well 
without any heddles, with the finger and thumb. — I submit that 
the difliculties of the question are largely met if the theory be 
adopted that the method of weaving was that of weft-mosaic. 
This is confirmed by the very few examples of ancient stuffs 
extant, and by all the known ancient representations of weaving 
and weaving appliances. 

when, instead of plain cloth, the webs were woven 
of rich material, ornamented with beautiful design 
and colour, and enriched with gold and silver 
threads cunningly wrought into their texture by 
means of the shuttle or needle, they became 
precious possessions and were highly prized as 
works of art. Indeed beautiful fabrics, for use as 
hangings, and ceremonial robes seem to have 
formed no inconsiderable part of the wealth of 
the ancient Greeks and Romans. 

That spinning and weaving were amongst the 
usual domestic occupations of the country is 
shown by such passages as the followmg '.— 
Virgil pronounces the seventeenth day lucky, 
either for planting the vine or taking and tammg 
oxen, and ' for adding new threads to the loom' 
(Georgics, I, 285), and in describing the pleasures 
and occupations of a winter night he describes the 
good man's wife beguiling her long labour with 
singing and ' running through the web with her 
shrill comb.' (Georgics, I, 294.) Hesiod, m 
' Works and Days,' speaks of ' the matron who 
cheerfully plies her loom at home,' and recommends 
the kind of clothing suitable during the rigours 
of winter : — 

Soft be the inward vest, the outward strong, 
And large to wrap you warm, down reaching long ; 
Thin lay your warp, when you the loom prepare, 
And close to weave the woof no labour spare. 

(Hesiod, Op. 779, trans. Cooke.) 

Euripides furnishes us with information as to 
the division of the work between the ladies and 
their maids. Iphigenia, lamenting her banishment, 
regrets her pleasant occupations at home : 

But now beside the ruthless sea I make my cheerless home, 
an alien . . . never singing Hera's praise, my Qjeen in Argos, 
nor amid the merry whirr of looms embroidering with my 
shuttle a picture of Athenian Pallas and the Titans. 

(Eurip. Iph. in Tauris, trans. Coleridge, p. 345.) 

Such passages imply that the weaving of plain 
stuffs was done by servants or slaves, and that the 
ladies of the family occupied themselves with orna- 
menting the finer textures with pictorial and 
other designs in rich coloured threads. Another 
passage from Euripides points to the same conclu- 
sion in the case of a piece of still more elaborate 
decoration : 

Or in the City of Pallas, the home of Athena of the beauteous 
chariot, shall I upon her saffron robe yoke horses to the car, 
embroidiring them :,n my web in brilliant varied shades, or the 
race of the Titans, whom Zeus, the son of Chronos, lays to 
their unending sleep with biit of Hashing flime ? 

(Eu ip. Hecuba, trans. Coleridge, p. 145 ) 

The classic writers speak thus of weaving as a 
domestic art, but apparently schools or factories 
also existed in which the business of making 
large and important pieces of ornamental textile 
work was carried on. A probable example of such 
trade-work was the wonderful piece of textile 
described by Aristotle : 

Man say that a mintle was prepared for Alcimenes, the 
Sybarite, of such magnificence that it was exhibited at Lacinmm 


The TecJuiique of Greek and "^oman Weaving 

during the festival of Hera, at which all the Italians assemble, 
and that it was admired more than all the things that were 
shown there. Of this tliev say that Dioiiysius tlie elder 
obtained possession, and sold it to the C uthaginians for one 
hundred and twenty talents [ibout ^26,000 of our money]. It 
was of purple, fifteen cubits in width, and was adorned on 
citlier side with liitle tiijures inwoven, above with Susa, below 
with Persians ; in tlie middle were Zeus, Hera, Themis, Athena, 
Apollo and Aphrodite. Near each extremity was Alcimenes, 
and on bo'.h sides Sybaris. 

(Aristotle, ' De Mirabilibus Auscultationibus.') 

Tliough it is difficult to cite positive proofs that 
in early classic days weaving was practised as a 
profession or trade, there can be no doubt that 
amongst the Romans it was so practised in later 
tirnes,"and that large pieces of tapestry and em- 
broidery were produced for sale, and on order, for 
public decorations. The Emperor Nero is said to 
have had woven a velarium for the amphitheatre, 
ornamented with mythological scenes representing 
gods and men, which was produced in an in- 
credibly short time. So huge and important a 
work could hardly have been executed except by 
professional weavers working under skilful direc- 
tion in an organized factory. 

Among the Romans certainly, if not among the 
Greeks, weaving was to a great extent slave-labour, 
whether done at home or in factories. And in 
spite of the pictures of ' delightful nests of beautiful 
young girls engaged in this fascinating occupation,' 
in which some writers have exercised their imagi- 
nation, it would seem that the sober view of 
weaving in classic times as the common domestic 
occupation of the household, is also the correct 

one. As regards the literary allusions to weaving, 
plain cloth more or less closely woven, such as 
can be made on the simplest of looms, is most 
frequently referred to. The variations of texture 
mentioned, thin and light or thick or heavy shining 
with silk or twisted metal, or coarse and strong for 
ordinary wear, are all such as can be obtained by 
the use of different kinds of thread especially for 
the weft, and require no complicated appliances 
for their production. 

The only specimens of plain cloth remaining to 
the present day are the fine linens of Egypt, and 
these may no doubt be taken as types of all con- 


temporary weaving. Amongst the whole of these 
specimens there are none that could not have been 
woven on the simplest form of loom, such as, it 
will be presently shown, the Greeks possessed. 
The admirable points in these ancient webs are, 
their great evenness of weaving and the good 
quality — and in some cases, the extreme fineness — 
of the linen threads used for their warp and weft. 
At the same time that the Egyptians were weaving 
linen the Chinese were weaving silk, the Hindoos 
cotton, and the Greeks flax and wool. In all these 
countries, however, at those early times the weaving 
seems to have been invariably of the simplest kind. 
Up to the present time no example has been found 
of complicated weaving earlier than the third or 
fourth century A.D., although it is generally 
supposed that the Chinese had invented a kind of 
damask pattern-weaving at an earlier period. 

The ornamental designs on these ancient webs 
are described as of three kinds : (i) Homer in the 
Iliads speaks of a 'sprigged and flowered web.' 
This seems to suggest a ground dotted with 
fl iwers and leaves, as naturally treated as the 
skill of the artist would allow [c.f. FIGURE i]. (2) 
Aeschylus writes, 'And behold this web, the work 
of thy shuttle, and on it the delineation of wild 
beasts ' (Choephorce, 230, 232) [c.f. FIGURE 2]. 
It is well known that the textiles of Persia and 
India were imported into Greece, and there highly 
prized at a very early period. It seems natural, 
therefore, that the favourite subjects of Indian art. 

which have always been hunting scenes, should 
have been copied by Greek ladies in their weaving 
and embroidery. Homer's description of such a 
scene woven in a king's robe might serve to describe 
the design of an Indian textile at almost any 
period : 

In the rich woof a hound mosaic drawn 
Bore on full stretch, and seized a dappled fawn ; 
Deep in his neck his fangs indent their hold, 
They pant and struggle in the moving gold. 

(Odyssey, Book 19.) 

(3) It was, however, in pictorial representations of 
scenes from their history and mythology that the 





The Technique of Greek and Roman Weaving 

Greeks and Romans chiefly loved to decorate 
their webs ; if we may judge from the graphic 
descriptions of such designs which are given, 
often at great length, by the classic writers. Homer 
furnishes examples of many such descriptions, 
such as — 

She found Queen Htlena at home, at work about a weed 
Woven for herself ; it shined Uke fire, was rich and full of size, 
The work on both sides being alike,^ in which she did comprise 
The many labours warlike Troy and brass-armed Greece 

For her fair sake. 

Another instance is found in Euripides's Iphigenia: 

Iph.— l have heard that they fell out about a golden lamb. 
Orestes — Canst thou remember broidering this on the fine 

texture of thy web ? 

• ♦ » » • 

Orestes — Hast thou forgotten the picture on thy loom, the 

changing of the Sun God's course ? 
Iph. — That was the very pattern I broidered with fine 

twisted thread. 

(Iph. in Tauris, Coleridge, p. 364.) 

The same author gives fine descriptions of woven 
pictures in Ion, lines 200 to 269 and 1141 to 1165. 
Virgil also in the Aeneid, tells of a rich cloak of 
gold tissue having a purple border with a double 
wavy edge on which gods and men, together with 
trees and beasts, were pictured in lifelike fashion. 
The Aeneid, 250 to 258. 

It is noticeable that the essential character of 
subjects of all these descriptions is that of freedom 
of design. There is no suggestion of mechanical 
repetition either in the simplest or the most 
elaborate works described. This is strong evi- 
dence that such appliances as are required for the 
e.xact repetitions of modern woven ornaments 
were not used by weavers in classic times. For 
such works as are spoken of, the complicated 
system of heddles or other fittings of the modern 
loom would be a hindrance and obstruction to the 
work rather than a help. 

There have, at present, been discovered only 
two specimens of actual Greek ornamental weav- 
ing. These are preserved in the Hermitage, St. 
Petersburg. They were found in a tomb on the 
site of a Greek colony in the Crimea, and are 
supposed to be parts of a headdress dating from 
the fifth century B.C, 

The decoration of one of these fragments 
[Plate, a] consists in rather natural representa- 
tions of ducks, arranged as a diaper on a plain 
ground. In the other piece is woven a portion of 
a simple ornamental border with freely repeated 
conventional forms. The weaving itself is of the 
most primitive kind, in which alternate warp- 
threads are intersected by a single weft-thread 
[Figure 3]. In the groundwork, the weft, which 
is of the same colour as the warp, is drawn tight, 

'^ A characteristic of simple tapestry work. Cf. 'toSisera . . . 
a prey of divers colours of needlework, of divers colours of 
needlework on both sides.' — Judges, v. 30. 

* Drawings of both fragments are given in Thomson's 
' History of Tapestry,' 

as in ordinary plain weaving, whilst in the design 
it is of a different colour, and is put in so loosely 
as to allow of its entirely covering up the warp- 
threads. The diagram will explain this point, 
which is important, as there can be no doubt 
that it is the key to the technique of all classic 
textile art. In ordinary plain weaving the weft- 
thread intersecting the warp-threads is drawn tight 
by the shuttle as it passes swiftly from side to side 
of the web. The effect of this is seen in FIGURE 3, A 
in which the warp is as much in evidence as the 
weft. In Figure 3, b the weft has been put in 
loosely ; consequently, as it passes one way and is 

3, B 

3. A 

pressed down, it covers the front of one thread 
and the back of the next as far as it is carried ; 
when it is passed back, over and under alternate 
warp-threads, the covering up of both the front 
and back of all the warp in the course it has 
travelled is complete. Thus it will be seen that 
any shapes or spaces left unwoven in the ground, 
or having their weft-threads cut away as in drawn 
thread work, may be filled in, line by line, at the 
discretion of the weaver. Weaving with a loose 
weft in mosaic-like patches of colour is known as 
' tapestry ' weaving, and is not only the sole method 
of work by which the ancient Egyptian and classic 
tapestries, hangings, and the ornamental portions 
of all textiles must have been woven, but is the 
way in which the magnificent productions of the 
Mediaeval and Renaissance schools of tapestry 
were certainly made. 

Much light has been thrown on the technique 
and the style of ornament of classic textiles by the 
discovery, in recent years, of a large collection of 
highly ornamented garments and furniture-fabrics, 
woven of linen and beautifully decorated with 
embroidery and woven designs in silk and wool. 
These interesting specimens were found in the 
tombs of Upper Egypt, and are in a wonderful 
state of preservation. They belong to the Egypto- 
Roman and Coptic periods, and in point of 
technique are precisely the same as some specimens 
of ancient Egyptian weaving, still more recently 
discovered, which were certainly made during the 
eighteenth dynasty (about 1500 to 2000 B,c.).* The 
British and the South Kensington Museums have 

* For drawings of these see Thomson. 


The Technique of Greek and Roman JVeaving 

been fortunate enough to acquire a great number 
of tlie Egypto-Roinan textile fragments. The 
finest and most perfect of all is in the British 
Museum. The ground is plain undycd linen, and 

the beautifully wrought tapestry ornaments are 
scattered over it. There are also broad and 
elaborate borders designed in classic style. The 
varied colours of the wools are, for the most part, 
as fresh and bright as when they were at first 
woven. The largest example of pure tapestry 
weaving, without the plain linen ground, is in the 
South Kensington Museum. It is a portion of a 
large hanging, and is purely ornamental in 
character, the ornament consisting of birds and 

Thus we find that at three classic periods, very 
distant from each other, the technique of weaving 
was evidently the same — at 2000 B.C. in ancient 
Egypt, at 500 B.C. in a Greek colony, and again in 
Egypt, under Roman influence, in the earliest 
centuries of the Christian era. Seeing, therefore, 
that there are no traces of any other kind of textile 
methods being made use of, we may fairly assume 
that they were unknown in classic times. 

This assumption of the simplicity of classic 
spinning and weaving is confirmed by the repre- 
sentations of looms found painted on the walls of 
Egyptian tombs, and on the vases of ancient 
Greece, as well as by the fragments of actual 
spinning and weaving appliances which remain 
to the present day. Only six ancient paintings of 
looms are at present known. Of these three are 
Egyptian and three Greek. The most instructive 
example is on an Etruscan vase in the Chiusi 
Museum. The painting represents Penelope at her 
loom. The loom is upright and of the very simplest 
construction [FIGURE 6]. It is merely a frame with 
a roller at the top, on to which the cloth, as it is 

foliage, arranged in horizontal bands, and woven 
in bright-coloured wools [Plate, b]. There are 
also in the same collection many small panels and 
borders of exquisitely fine tapestry weaving, some 
sewn on to plain linen ground, while others are 
worked on the actual warp-threads of the web 
itself. Figure 4 is an applied panel, and Figure 5 
is tapestry woven in the warp-threads of a web. 


woven, is wound. A portion of the cloth already 
woven is represented rolled upon the beam, and 
the lower edge of the web just finished shows a 
border having a design of winged creatures upon 
it. Exactly the same kind of design may be seen on 
the garments of many of the figures on the Greek 
vases of the period, proving conclusively that the 
loom shown was the ordinary one in use for domestic 

The Technique of Greek and Roman Weaving 

pattern-weaving [FIGURES 7 and 8]. The warp- 
threads are kept tense by a row of weights, one 
being hung on each thread, and are kept from 
getting entangled by two rods, which are so passed 
between alternate threads as effectually to prevent 
them from getting out of place while the work is 
going on. In this loom no heddles or other 

appliances for opening the warp for passing the 
weft are shown, so that the primitive fashion of 
picking up the threads with the fingers must have 
been used instead of mechanical heddles— a 
method which is most frequently adopted by 
pictorial tapestry weavers at the present time. 

This construction of the loom and manner of 
arranging the warp with a flat rod, which neces- 
sitates beating the weft together from below, 
agrees with the allusions to it by Herodotus, who 
noticed, when he visited Egypt, that the Egyptians 
beat their weft together from above with a heavy 
comb instead of from below with a spatha, or 
rod, as the Greeks did. The manner of keeping 
the warp tense by means of separate little weights 
on each thread is evidenced by the finding during 
excavations of numbers of terra-cotta loom weights 
(the only imperishable part of the Greek loom), 
many of which may be seen in the British 
Museum, in the case illustrating the arts of 
spinning and weaving, in the gallery of Greek 

and Roman life. The two other vase-paintings 
of the Greek loom, although rougher in execution 
than that of the Chiusi vase, show exactly the 
same construction and arrangement. One of 
these is in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, and 
the other on a vase in the British Museum. It is 
from the former that the accompanying illustration 
is taken [Figure 8]. The subject of both these 
paintings is an incident in the legend of Circe, 
the moment when the sorceress is in the act of 
offering the noxious potion to Ulysses. The 
looms in both cases are alike, but in the British 
Museum vase the weft, wound upon a spool, is 

It is probable that for larger works of pictorial 
tapestry, especially in Koman times, the Egyptian 
plan of fixing the warp firmly at both the top and 
bottom of the loom was adopted, and that the weft 
was beaten together from above with a heavy 
comb. Such an arrangement of the warp and 
treatment of the weft would seem to be much 
more suitable for such important works; but, 
whatever method, as regards these details, was 


The Technique of Greek and Roman JVeaving 

adopted, the loom, without doubt, was equally 
simple in construction, and for tapestry weaving 
has always remained so. In its unvarying 
simplicity the tapestry loom differs from that 
used for mechanical pattern-weaving, which has 
become more and more complicated since the 
invention of the draw-loom, first generally used in 
the East in the early centuries of the present era. 

Perhaps the most magnificent tapestry hangings 
ever produced were woven in Brussels in the early 
part of the si.xtcenth century. It is from one of 
these that the illustration [c] on the Plate is 
taken. It is difficult to imagine any finer design 

and craftsmanship than is shown in the compo- 
sition and details of the tapestry weaving of this 
period. If, too, we may believe the records of the 
times, the speed with which these works were 
executed was as marvellous as the excellence 
displayed in their manipulation. 

Seeing then that such works as the Mediaeval and 
Renaissance tapestries could be woven on such 
simply arranged looms, it is easy to believe that all 
the famous webs of antiquity of which we have 
account could have been, and indeed were, made 
without any of the mechanical contrivances 
usually imagined necessary for their production. 


Some months ago an original picture by Velazquez 
was discovered, which had not been recognized 
before. It is a bust-portrait of a young ecclesiastic 
upon canvas, measuring 51cm. high and 42 cm. 
broad (20 in. by i6i in.) [see Plate]. 

It must be placed in the chronology of Velazquez 
no earlier than the last years of his youth spent in 
his native city, Seville, and no later than the first 
years of his sojourn in Madrid ; that is to say, 
between 1620 and 1624. 

Eveiy detail of the painting leads me to this 
conclusion. The lateral lighting of the head, 
producing a strong contrast between the side in 
light and the side in shadow ; the warm tints pre- 
vailing in the dark portion ; the pronounced 
relief of the features; the strong lighting of the 
salient points, accentuated by the artist with the 
finest touches of almost pure white on the fore- 
head, nose and lower lip ; the sure, vigorous 
handling of the stray locks of hair, looking as if 
they were engraved rather than painted — in fact, 
the general tonality — are characteristic of the 
works produced by Velazquez during those years. 
Nor are these characteristics repeated later, except 
in the famous picture, Los Borrnclios^- in which the 
master left us a compendium of his earlier works, 
and finally abandoned the manner of interpreting 
nature which he had followed until then. It is 
known that from the time when he first set foot 
in Italy he changed his manner for a freer 
technique in which finer tints predominated. 
This was a second evolution precursive of the 
third, in which were evolved the masterly works 
of his later years. 

The analogy of the Portrait of a Young Ecclesi- 
astic with another bust-portrait A Young Man, 
uii1:nOiiHi (No. 1103), in the Museo del Prado, 
which I have always believed to belong to the 

' Translated for the author. 
''I.e., Topers. 


latest years of the Seville period (1620 to 1623), 
helps to confirm the reasons which cause me to 
fix the epoch which I have indicated as the time 
when the picture must have been painted. 

Although the young ecclesiastic is of a distinctly 
Spanish type, there is something of the gipsy 
about him. The vivacity of his eyes, which he 
fixes upon the spectator, and the smiling expression 
of his half-open mouth animate his personality, 
and give it a certain picaresque humour. To this 
trait Dr. August L. Mayer alludes pertinently in 
the judicious and interesting note which he 
published recently in ' Der Cicerone.' ' He says 
that, in spite of the sacred profession exercised by 
the subject of the portrait, he could not have been 
entirely absorbed in his devotions, since he looks 
like one of the young painter's merry companions, 
who would not have lost the chance of letting drop 
some of those chistes peculiar to his race, during 
the sittings in which he served as a model. 

Who the sitter was, we are quite ignorant, but 
his ecclesiastical status is plainly shown by the 
skull cap visible on the back of his head, by the 
black collar of his cassock, and by the cloak with 
the rather coarse grey woollen hood which covers 
his shoulders. 

The white line of the shirt is the highest note 
and the raven-black hair the lowest. The tint of 
the background, of a warm grey very similar to 
that of many other backgrounds in the master's 
portraits, harmonizes with the predominant tints 
of the head and drapery. 

The picture was in Seville during the last third 
of the nineteenth century, in the renowned collec- 
tion of Don Jose Caiiaveral, in which appeared 
other fine works by Velazquez — Christ and the 
Pilgrims at Einniaus, which, I believe, has been 
taken to America within these last few months, 
and the St. Peter, which is now in my own pos- 

Tlie Young Ecclesiastic is one more of the rare 
canvases by Velazquez, which had not been 

3 Vide ' Der Cicerone,' Hft. 20, p. 672 (Oktober, 1910). 










catalogued before, and the fortunate discovery is a 
matter for sincere congratulation with the present 
owner, to whom amateurs of Spanish art are so 
deeply indebted, not only for the exquisite taste with 
which he has succeeded in restoring the famous 
Casa del Greco in Toledo, but still more for his 
gift to the State of the adjoining museum, also 
called the Museo del Greco. It already contains 
an invaluable collection of that master's pictures, 
which will no doubt be enriched in course of time, 
thanks to the well-proved zeal and knowledge of 
the generous founder and donor. 

A. DE Beruete. 


A FEWyears ago an English gentleman, an amateun 
was visiting for no particular purpose the sale-rooms 
of a well-known firm of auctioneers in London, 
when his attention was arrested by a dark old 
portrait ornamented with a series of brightly painted 
shields of armorial bearings. Pleased with the 
decorative effect of these heraldic paintings, he left 
a commission for this picture, and obtained it for a 
very small sum, in fact one which could be counted 
in shillings. The portrait hung unnoticed in his 
London house, until it was removed not long ago 
to his country seat. While visiting there this 
summer, my attention was called to the light falling 
on the white collar of an otherwise almost inde- 
cipherable figure. A little ordinary surface-cleaning 
quickly revealed the outline of a bearded man in a 
broad-brimmed black hat with a jewelled band to 
it. The very first impression was that this portrait 
was akin to some of the portraits of Rembrandt's 
middle period, but it was with feelings of startled 
surprise that I found close to the right shoulder the 
unmistakeable signature of Rembrandt himself. 
The portrait now assumed a new aspect of interest. 
Whereas originally the interest of the portrait 
consisted in the sixteen shields of arms, each 
bearing its name, it now became possible not only 
to identify this despised old portrait as a genuine 
work of Rembrandt, but even with the help of 
the armorial bearings to discover the identity of the 

The portrait, as will be seen from the reproduc- 
tion, represents a man in the full vigour of life, with 
good straight aristocratic features, thick bushy hair 
falling to his shoulders, thick moustache, and short 
beard and whiskers, cut to the shape of the face. 
The hair seems to be a lightish brown, slightly 
tinged with grey. He wears a black cloak, a plain 
white linen collar, and a large black hat with an 
or.iamented or jewelled band round the crown. 
He is evidently a man of distinction. Over the 
portrait round the head has been painted a series 
of sixteen shields, each containing a family coat of 
arms, the name of the family being inscribed under 
each shield. These shields are painted in gold and 

Notes on Various Works of Art 

bright heraldic colours. They appear to be sus- 
pended to a ribbon, caught up by a ring at each 
upper corner of the picture and fastened with a 
pair of golden tassels at the bottom. A wreath of 
laurel has been painted round the head, before the 
shields were added, and at a still later date the in- 
scription Ohiil 2/ Decern has been painted in large 
coarse white cursive characters across the body of 
the portrait. Traces of further decorative additions 
can be seen behind the head and shoulders of the 
portrait. The portrait is painted on panel and 
measures about 36 by 28 inches. 

On submitting a rough sketch and description 
of the portrait to the learned Director of the 
Rijks-museum at Amsterdam, Jonckheer B. W. F. 
van Hiemsdijk, he was kind enough to consult 
his friend, Jonckheer Rutgers van Rozenburg, 
Secretary to the High Court of Nobility at The 
Hague, who was good enough in his turn to look 
the matter up and supply the following information. 

The shields of arms are arranged in groups of 
four and are to be read by dimidiating the whole 
group, and starting with the two shields in the 
centre above the head of the portrait. Of these 
the dexter shield should denote the husband, the 
sinister the wife, and the shields, read to the left of 
the spectator in the case of the husband, and to the 
right in the case of the wife, would give the family 
quaiterings. In this case the dexter shield bearing or 
three eagles displayed sable has the name of Echten, 
the sinister shield bearing Quarterly countercharged 
sable and anient a deini-eagle displayed impaling 
two fleiir de lys all countercharged has the name of 
Mertensen. Following the order indicated above, 
the quarterings attached to the shield of Echten 
are named, Witten, Raitenborch, Appelthoren, 
Brinen, Leyden, Ten Water, and Kranck (?), and 
those attached to the shield of Mertensen bear the 
names, Brinen, Yrt, Weese, Dotecom, Leyden, 
Ten Holte, Domselr. 

This information enabled Jhr. van Rozenburg 
to identify the portrait as that of Johan van Echten, 
the head of a noble family at Relaer in the 
province of Over Yssel, born about 1608, who 
married in 1633 Judith Martens, or Martensen, 
and who died July 21, 1679. He was thus a con- 
temporary of Rembrandt, and his connexion 
with the painter may have been due to his 
brother, Evert van Echten, who in 1644 was 
chosen to represent the province of Over Yssel at 
the College of the Admiralty in Amsterdam. 

It will be noticed that the obituary date painted 
upon the portrait, Obiit 21 Decent, does not corre- 
spond with the actual date of Johan van Echten's 
death. Jhr. van Rozenburg has, however, made 
the further discovery that in the church of Raalte 
there is a heraldic monumental tablet still hanging 
to the memory of a son of Johan van Echten, 
who died on December 21, 1718 ; the principal 
group of arms on this tablet contains the actual 


Notes on J^arious Works of Art 

sixteen described above, and S3 arranged ; \-lz., 
E^hten, Witten, R'jyter.b.^rg, Apeldoorn, Brinen, 
Levden, . le Water, and Kreynck. and Martensen, 
Brinen, Yrt, Weese, D^etecon:. Leyden. te Holte, 
and Domselaer. The o: the portrait so 
far as the faaiily is concerned Ls therefore complete. 
The portrait could not possibly be that of the 
son. who died in 1718. but evidently represents 
the father, Johan \-an Echten, who must have en- 
joyed sufficient repute among his descendants for 
one of them to have ornamented — or disfigured — 
his portrait with the laurel garland and the shidds 
of arms, while another added in error the date of 
the son's death, by mistake for that of the father. 
Jhr. van Roz^nburg furtho- ascertained that the 
race of Van Echten is now extincL Relaer was 
inherited by a great-giand-dangfater, Judith Sophia 
van Echten, who mairiel in 1758 Dr. Saloman 
Lindemann and died before October 27, 1774, 
leaving a family. The strange history of this 
portrait may still therefore be traceable up to its 
appearance in the London sale-room. It has, as 
might be expected, suffered sadly from injury and 
friction, but there can still be recognized the 
magisterial hand of Rembrandt and the dignified 
features of Johan van Echten tot Relaer. In any 
circumstances it is interesting to be able to restore 
to the list of Rembrandt's wor^ a portrait in 
which the idenlitv of the sitter can be established. 


Si-NXE The BciujyGTOX Magazixe* has extended 
the hospitality of is pages to the illustration of 
' New Hctures by Francesco Napoletano,' it would 
sean almost a pity not to iUnstrate the two 
Madonmis now in American collections, to one of 
which only M. Seymour de Ricci refers in his 
text.- The Burungtox Magazixe will thus be 
aUe to ofiier its readeis reproductions of all the 
seven known pictures by this very obscure follower 
of Leonardo da Vinci, the twochief works beingalso 
there illostrated — viz., the Brera and the Znridi 
Madonnas. For the moment let me confess that I 
dare Mr. Berenson's implied estimafeof Francesco, 
if, as I suppose, that estimate is the cause of his ex- 
clusion from the lists published in ' North Italian 
Painters of the Renai^ance.' Nor should I con- 
sider the National Gallery thericherfor his presence. 
He is at the best but a * c ' - r le imitation ' of 
the real thing, ar?d i* :- . u ;: impossible to 
• roister 'any in r! ^ryie.^ But such as it is 

»V-- — ^ -? :■ :- T-T- 

- T ■ - 1 ; an twice 

can be appreciated from M. de Ricci's dis- 
criminating article, and we take leave of Francesco 
with the pious hope that his other paintings be 
left in a dignified retirement, suitable to their 
merits. Herbert Cook. 



i^nET IS a leeoK wock <x oeznanuB: 

KXEIXER, like Lely, while held responsible for 
sins he did not commit, is often deprived of work 
that he undoubtedly executed. Instiauices of wrong 
attributions abound ; a case in point is No. 559 of 
the National Portrait Gallery. This portrait of the 
Speaker, Onslow, has lately been taken away from 
Kneller and ^ven to Hyssing. I wish, however, to 
draw attention to other unrecognized examples by 
Kneller in the same gallery and to contemporary 
copies from him. 

The three-quarters length portrait of Heneage 
Finch, Eari of Nottingham (14^0), is catalogued as 
by Sir Peter Lely. The real question seemed to 
be whether it was after Riley or Sir Godfrey. 
The engraving by R. White inscribed with ' Kneller 
pinxit' seems to settle it, and reveals an unusual 
and early a^)ect of the arlisL 

Archbishcf TiUokon, No. 24, is labelled ' Painted 
by Mary Beale in 1681.' Beale's diary for 168 1 
no doubt su^ested tiiis. Houbraken's and White's 
engravings, however, cleariy prove that this portrait 
is a copy from Kneller's originaL From engraving 
also we can see that Mrs. Beale's portrait of the 
Archbishop is quite different, presenting him in a 
wig and of a type nearer to Lely's rendering of 
him. Also he looks younger than in Kneller^s. 
These portraits of Lord Nottingham and Tillofson 
in the Portrait Gallery are copies from, and more 
or less contemporary with, KneDer. The por- 
trait of John Home {2965), on the other hand, is an 
ori^nal and comparatively early Kneller. To this 
earlines it owes its description in the catalogue, 
' Painter Uncertain.' Work Kneller did between 
1674, when be settled in London, and about 1684, 
to which year the finely painted Jatms II in the 
Portrait Gallery belong is not voy common, 
and when it does not pass for Lely's is frankly 
consigned to the unknown. His head by himself 
at South Ken^gton must be quite an eariy 
^>eciinen. C. H. C. B. 


The city of Cologne i? ;r-i::y t: be congrarulsTed 
on its enlightened enterprli-e and pub'.-c ~p;nr. The 
arts of China and Japan, so long r^arded as merely 
decorative and industrial, and rel^ated to the 
ethnographical sections of museums, have at last 
b^un to be a serious study ; and it is everywhere 









Notes on Various Works of Art 

recognized that their scope and attainment 
can only be realized to the full through the more 
ideal expressions of the aesthetic instincts of the 
two races. Only in painting and sculpture do we 
find the key to the principles of design which 
animate the lesser arts. Cologne is the first city 
in Europe to found a museum exclusively devoted 
to the art of the Far East. The building, now in 
course of erection, on a site adjoining the Kunst- 
gewerbe Museum, has been planned in detail 
according to the views of Prof. Adolf Fischer, 
who has spent many years in Asiatic travel and 
has acquired for the museum in China and 
Japan the works of art which are to fill it. The 
objects ought therefore to be far more effectively 
exhibited and harmoniously arranged than is 
possible in a building not planned for the purpose. 
In December last a selection of the more important 
works in the collection were exhibited in a room 
of the Kunstgewerbe Museum : and, to judge from 
these, the collection should prove to be one of the 
finest of its kind in Europe. The early Japanese 
Buddhist paintings include some specimens of 
extraordinary beauty and importance ; Chinese 
painting of Sung and Ming periods was represented 
in the exhibition by a few chosen works of 
impressive power ; and the pieces of early sculpture 
were also very remarkable. It will certainly be a 
great gain for the European student to have access 
to a museum where this Oriental art can be studied 
comprehensively in its various manifestations ; and 
it is to be hoped that other towns will follow the 
example of Cologne. 

Laurence Binyon. 

The Trustees of the National Gallery of Helsingfors 
acquired recently at the Grafton Gallery two 
pictures, one the Ulysses by Maurice Denis, the 
other Lcs Maisoiis Jaiincs by Cezanne. Van Gogh 
is already well represented in the Helsingfors 
Gallery. These two pictures are admirably chosen 
as representative of the most striking, and one 
believes the most promising, of all recent artistic 
movements. The Ulysses and Calypso of Maurice 
Denis is certainly among the best recent creations 
of this sympathetic and scholarly artist. If his 
work lacks the spontaneity of the earlier pioneers 
in the movement, it shows none the less the 
advantages of scholarship and taste. It is not a 
little surprising indeed to find that one of the chief 
exponents of a movement which is generally 
accused of being revolutionary should be among 
the most learned of all modern artists. How 
many reminiscences we find here of the great 
classic tradition of France, the tradition of Poussin, 
Ingres, and Puvis de Chavannes, a tradition which 
no movement in France, however revolutionary it 

may appear, ever loses sight of for long. But 
with all his scholarship Maurice Denis has a 
certain witty gaiety of manner, a command of 
fantastic narrative invention which is admirably 
shown in this example. If one were inclined to 
be critical, it might be to point out the use of so 
definitely naturalistic a rendering as that shown 
in the distance where the squall of rain passes 
across the blue Mediterranean, in a design the 
general scheme of which is so far removed from 
the illusion of actual appearance ; but none the 
less in itself, this motive is beautifully and subtly 

Cezanne's work, Lcs Maisoiis Ramies, is in a 
very different category. Without any reminis- 
cences of the classic tradition of France, Cezanne 
is, in fact, one of the most intensely and profoundly 
classic artists that even France has produced, and 
by classic I mean here the power of finding in 
things themselves the actual material of poetry 
and the fullest gratification for the demands of the 
imagination. Certainly nothing at first sight could 
appear more banal, more trivial, less worthy of an 
artist's deliberate care than the little wayside scene 
in the South of France which Cezanne has taken 
for his motive. A short strip of road crossing a 
small gully and turning the edge of a hill by some 
houses which are without any picturesque interest, 
a few trees, telegraph posts, the slope of a wooded 
hill, and the sky beyond — there is the material, in 
itself so matter-of-fact and apparently insignificant, 
out of which Cezanne's magic art distils for us 
this strange and haunting vision. The compo- 
sition, apparently accidental and unarranged, is in 
reality the closest, most vividly apprehended unity. 
Out of these apparently casual rectangular formsTl 
from the play of a few bare upright and horizontal 
masses, a structure is built up that holds the 
imagination. To the inquiring eye new relations, 
unsuspected harmonies continually reveal them- 
selves ; and this is true no less of the subtle, pure 
and crystaHine colour than of the linear con- 
struction of the pattern. In the history of paint- 
ing one comes but rarely upon pictures which 
have, like this, an inevitable unity that baffles 
all analysis and explanation. However different 
this may be in the absence of all direct suggestion 
of romantic imagery, it has for me at all events 
something of the fascination, something of the 
inexplicable mystery of Giorgione's Tempest. The 
building of a design upon horizontal and upright 
lines is a task that has rarely been successfully 
accomplished, but when as here it has been 
achieved, the result is of surpassing beauty. 
Cezanne has produced many landscapes of more 
striking and obvious beauty than this, but few I 
think which reveal more truly the intensity and 
the spontaneity of his imaginative reaction to 

Roger Fry. 


Notes on Various JVorks of Art 


[We have pleasure in publishing the following 
note by request of flic Direction of the exhibi- 
tion. — Ed.] 

The extraordinary success of the Exhibition of 
One Hundred Portraits, held in Paris in 1909, has 
led some of those who were responsible for it to 
organise another exhibition of the works of English 
artists of the eighteenth century. It will consist 
entirely of pastels, without restriction as to 
subject. English pastels of the eighteenth century 
are, for the most part, practically unknown in 
France, where they are usually attributed 
indiscriminately to John Russell. It is hoped 
that the exhibition will show that the pastellists of 
the period were not only very numerous, but also 
distinguished by marked differences of style and 
technique, and that John Russell was not perhaps 
the best of them, although, for some reason, he is 
the best known. The exhibition will be held in 
the Brunner Galleries, Rue Royale (rented for 
the occasion by the promoters), and will 
be formally opened by their Excellencies the 
British Ambassador and Lady Feodorowna Bertie 
in the first week of next April ; it will remain 
open until June 15. Many other distinguished 
names appear in the list of patrons and members 
of the honorary committee: — M. Pierre de Nolhac 
(acting president), H.H. the Princesse Lucien 
Murat, the Duchesse d'Uzt:s, M. Armand Dayot, 
the Earl of Plymouth, Sir Walter Armstrong, Sir 
Charles Holroyd, Mr. Lionel Gust, Mr. C. J. 
Holmes, Mr. Claude Phillips, Mr. A. G. Temple, 
M. Leonce Benedite. 

One of the objects of the exhibition is to obtain 
funds for two of the most valuable Parisian 
charities, one English and the other French ; 
two-thirds of the profits will be given to the 
Victoria Home for aged Englishwomen resident 
in France, and the remaining third to the 
Orphelinat des Arts. 

It is hoped that so good a cause will induce 
owners of fine pastels to lend them to the exhibi- 
tion. There are very few English pastels of fine 
quality in France, but a few French collectors 
who possess them have already willingly consented 
to lend them. It is, however, necessarily from 



To the Editors of the BuRLiNGTON MAGAZINE. 
Gentlemen, — My efforts at solving an old 
problem are indeed honoured by the attentions of 
two opponents at once— Mr. Egerton Beck and 

I For former articles and letters on this subject see Vol. XVII , 
PP- 37-39. 5' (April) ; pp. 123-125 (May) ; p.^. 23', 232 (July) ; 
225 (December) ; 1910. 


England that the majority of the works must be 
obtained. Owners who shrink from sending 
pastels across the Channel should be reassured 
by the precautions which have been taken. The 
pastels will first be packed in cases which have 
been specially designed for securing works in 
that medium, and the cases will then be 
packed together in a van, which, by permis- 
sion of the French Customs authorities, will 
not be opened until it reaches the galleries 
where the exhibition is to be held. The risk of 
damage from shaking or other causes will thus be 
reduced to a minimum. Some pastels of great 
value were sent from England to the exhibition of 
pastels held in Paris in 1908, without incurring 
the smallest damage. 

All cost of packing, carriage and other expenses 
will be defrayed by the exhibition, and the works 
lent are insured at Lloyd's against all risk for the 
value put upon them by their owners from the 
moment that they leave their owners' hands until 
the moment of their return. It is said that the 
fire at the Brussels Exhibition has alarmed col- 
lectors ; but it should be remembered that that 
fire occurred in temporary constructions of a 
specially inflammable nature ; not in a permanent 
building such as the gallery where the Exhibition 
of English Pastellists will be held, which, on 
account of its construction and situation, is 
exposed to less than the ordinary risk. The best 
proof of the smallness of the risk incurred in the 
present case, whether during the journeys or in 
the course of the exhibition, is the low premium 
which has been accepted by the insurers, in con- 
sequence of the careful arrangements made by the 
promoters of the exhibition. 

Since it is essential that the representation of the 
English pastellists should be as complete and as 
choice as possible, and since it is difficult to discover 
the whereabouts of all fine examples, the organizers 
would be greatly obliged if anyone owning or 
knowing of a fine English pastel of the eighteenth 
century would communicate either with the com- 
missaire-general, Mr. Robert Dell, 9 rue Pasquier, 
Paris ; or the secretary of the exhibition, M. R. R. 
Meyer-S^e, 2, Cornwall Mansions, Kensington 
Court, W. The number of pastels exhibited will 
be about one hundred, although there is no precise 
numerical limit. 

M. Andre Demartial — in your columns and those 
of the ' Revue de I'Art Chr<^tien ' respectively. I 
could only wish that my courteous critics had 
recognised more fully that they were attacking a 
more considerable opponent than myself, viz. : 
the historian of the Limoges enamellers and 
former Archiviste de la Haute Vienne, the late M. 
Maurice Ardant, 

Letters to the Editors 

I have throughout made it perfectly clear, by 
giving my references, that 1 based my theory on 
the statements of M. Ardant ; I have made no 
claim whatever to documentary research on my 
own part. If the historians and genealogists 
among whom I think I am right in classing, for 
this purpose, Mr. Beck and M. Thomas, M. 
Demartial's authority) now decide that, in spite of 
all M. Ardant wrote, the Bishop of Nazareth in 
fact never could have borne the name of Montbas, 
even in the mouth of the common people, and 
that M. Ardant's statements as to his name and 
family are therefore inaccurate, I very freely 
admit that my suggested interpretation, which 
rested on those statements, falls to the ground 
with them. In doing so I may be allowed to take 
comfort for having accepted M. Ardant's authority 
on the point by recalling that I find myself here in 
company with such eminent French antiquaries 
as MM. Labarte, Darcel, Molinier, Bourdery, and 
Guibert and Tixier, all of whom in turn gave 
currency to the same inaccurate version of the 

Alas for human frailty ! Even my critics have 
fallen into temptation. For Mr. Beck himself 
followed M. Ardant in stating in a former letter 
that the bishop was the son of the Vicomte de 
Montbas, a statement now shown by M. Demartial 
(quoting M. Thomas) to be inaccurate. While M. 
Demartial, for his part, consistently speaks of 
Jean Barton as Archbishop of Nazareth, a dignity 
which Mr. Beck has shown he never held, having 
held, in fact, only a subordinate bishopric of 
Nazareth, suffragan to Caesarea. And I very 
much fear that Mr. Beck is at fault again in 
asserting that there are three enamels bearing the 
reputed signature. I have no doubt he has 
borrowed the statement from Darcel, but the 
supposed inscription of the Tondu plaque has 
been discredited by M. Demartial. 

Mr. Beck must allow me to say, on my part, that 
I did not think of putting forward the modern 
authorities I cited as contemporary evidence, but 
merely as the testimony of persons who might be 
supposed to be informed on the subject. I may 
add that other authorities, not to be lightly disposed 
of, Anselme and D'Hozier, quote examples of the 
surname ' Barton de Montbas ' occurring as early 
as the sixteenth and seventeenth century respec- 
tively, so perhaps Mr. Beck may have to re-consider 
his summary dismissal of the example in Lecler's 
' Armorial des Eveques de Limoges etc.', as due to 
careless editing. 

May I say, further, that I do not regard the 
admitted illiteracy of the interpretation I suggested 
as disproving it, for a reason which I should have 
thought self-evident — that the interpretation 
necessarily assumed the artist to have been an 
illiterate person, or he would not have written 
Monva for Montbas. As to the question of 

philology involved, I have quoted the opinion of 
Dr. Oelsner and can only leave it to philologists to 

Both of my critics have taken exception to the 
title of my article, ' Good-bye to " Monvaerni " ? ', 
but rather unreasonably, since they both admit 
that the inscription, whatever it may mean, does 
not bear that reading. Though my suggested 
interpretation was based on statements (of an 
official archivist) now shown to be inaccurate, 
and is therefore untenable, perhaps I may be 
allowed to hope that the actual reading of the 
inscription which I offered, accepted entirely 
by M. Demartial and at least in part by Mr. Beck, 
may yet help to elucidate the mystery. 

Yours faithfully, 

i6th January, 191 1. H. P. Mitchell. 

To the Editors of The Burlington Magazine. 
Gentlemen, — Permit me to say a few words 
about two of the interesting pictures attributed to 
Lucas van Leyden and published by Mr. Lionel 
Cust in the December issue of your valuable 
magazine. Nobody who is familiar with the work 
of Lucas will fail to recognize the unmistakeably 
' Leydenesque' character of the three Hampton 
Court pictures. Nevertheless, the execution is far 
too crude for a master of Lucas's rank. A careful 
examination of the originals revealed to me certain 
traits in these panels which make me feel con- 
vinced that they are but copies of lost originals by 
the rare master of Leyden. The most prominent 
one among these traits is the lameness of expression 
in the faces, which always characterizes copies of 
mediocre masters or scholars. Now, I think that 
for two of the panels I can offer a plausible 
explanation. These are the so-called Jiidginent of 
Titus Manliits Torquatus and the Communion of 
Herkenbald (Mr. Cust was careful enough to put 
question marks behind these denominations). 
Karel van Mander tells us in his ' Schilderboek ' 
(ed. Hymans, I, p. 146, biography of Lucas) that 
he saw in the house of a brewer in Delft a series 
of tempera paintings on linen by Lucas which 
represented the story of Joseph, and were originally 
used for decorations. The same author also records 
that they have been greatly injured by the damp- 
ness of Dutch atmosphere. One of these canvases 
has been identified by Mr. Sidney Colvin in a 
painting formerly in the collections of Lord 
Methuen and at Corsham and now in the Metro- 
politan Museum of Art New York (Marquand 
gift, 1888). It represents Joseph's coat being 
brought before Jacob and has been injured con- 
siderably by dampness. The rich architectural 
background is very similar to the one in the panel 
reproduced [PLATE, c, page 151] in the article by 

1 For the article here referred to see pp. 149, 150 (December, 


Letters to the Editors 

Mr. Cust, so is tlio conipcsition. Indeed, the two 
compositions could very well be regarded as 
pendants. I have not the least doubt that the two 
pictures from Hampton Court, illustrated in Mr. 
Gust's article [see Plate b and c], are copies 
after two other canvases of the same series to 
which the New York canvas originally belonged. 
[b] represents Simeon being bound and detained 
by Joseph, while in [c] we have most likely the 
death of Jacob (in the background there can be 
seen a group of Egyptians with the statue of an 
idol). The New York canvas is of larger propor- 
tions (67^ h. by 561 w.), an exact description of 
it will be found in the Catalogue of Paintings in 
the Metropolitan Museum. — Very truly yours, 

Morton H. Bernath. 
Leipsic, December, 1910. 


Selected Examples of Indian Art. By 

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy. 
Dr. Coojl\ras\vamy has endeavoured by the 
publication of forty-two reproductions of different 
periods of Indian art to assist in the slowly- 
awakening appreciation in this country of the 
importance of Indian design. As he says, Indian 
art has for too long been judged from entirely 
inadequate reproductions in woodcut or litho- 
graphy of some of the more showy and least 
interesting examples, so that Indian art is the 
' least known ' and the least accessible of all 
Asiatic arts. His plates are admirably reproduced, 
the sculpture in collotype and the pamtings either 
in collotype or by colour process. His coloured 
reproductions are strikingly above the average, and 
one or two of them are of real beauty as works 
of art. Nevertheless, by comparison with the 
sculptures, they suffer, I think, from the fact 
that they belong to the Mogul period when 
native traditions were dying out and when the 
imported Persian style was the only one practised. 
It is quite true that the Indian artists who worked 
for the Mogul emperors modified very materially 
the Persian originals, but the modification seems 
to have been chiefly in the direction of a rather 
petty realism. The great style of early Indian 
sculpture depended almost entirely upon the 
intensity of its religious inspiration ; the art of the 
Moguls, on the other hand, was essentially a servile 
art, and if we compare Indian art with other 
schools of Oriental design we are, I think, forced 
to the conclusion that the Indian is moved less 
than others by a pure sense of beauty ; his art 
therefore fails or succeeds almost entirely ac- 
cording to the intensity and imaginative beauty of 
the ideas which he seeks to express. 

In the early sculpture of Java, Ceylon, and one 
or two Indian centres such as Sarnath and Sanchi, 
those religious conceptions which the Indians 



To the Editors o/The Burlington Magazine. 

Gentlemen, — I would suggest Torbido as the 
author of the Virzi ' Raphael Lotto ' portrait dis- 
cussed by Mr. F"ry in the December number of 
The Burlington Magazine, pp. 137 and 8. 
Photographic comparison with Torbido's signed 
portrait in the Brera makes me almost certain of 
the attribution. 


Dan Fellows Platt. 

Englewood, New Jersey. 

[The colour-scheme of Signor Virzi's picture is so 
dissimilar from Torbido's, that I must say that 
I cannot accept Mr. Piatt's ingenious attribu- 
tion.— K. v.] 

comprehended more profoundly than any other 
race attain expression in forms of supreme 
grandeur and dignity. The statue of Kapila in 
Ceylon (seventh century) is not only as the author 
says one of the noblest of all Indian sculptures, 
but would take high rank in the sculpture of any 
time or country for its superb dignity of gesture 
and its feeling for scale, which may be tested by 
the fact that although the figure is actually under 
life size, the reproduction here given suggests a 
design of colossal proportions. 

Another sculpture of consummate beauty is that 
of a figure of a Tamil saint, probably of the 
twelfth century, Polonnaruva (Ceylon). It would 
be impossible in European sculpture to find any 
figure quite so profoundly expressive of the self- 
contamed dignity of the contemplative life. 

I have only hinted at a few of the masterpieces 
contained in this admirable portfolio. Dr. 
Coomaraswamy will confer a real benefit upon 
European students if he continues to make known 
the great masterpieces of Indian art, but we 
scarcely feel that his work is improved by the 
inclusion of examples from the praiseworthy, but 
as yet sentimental, school of modern Indian 
painters. The more he can give us of the great 
sculpture of the seventh and eighth centuries, the 
more we shall welcome his efforts to stimulate the 
study of Indian art. 

Era Filippo Lippi. Von Henriette Mendelsohn. 

Julias Bard. Berlin, 1909. 
Fraulein Mendelsohn has written a most con- 
scientious and careful study of Filippo Lippi. She 
has studied exhaustively all that has been written 
on the subject and she has evidently gone over 
the ground again with a keen and intelligent 
interest. She is scrupulously and minutely accu- 
rate and brings to the study of Lippi's pictures a 
wide knowledge of iconography which often 

Reviews and Notes 

enables Iier to make interesting criticisms from a 
rather unusual point of view. It cannot be denied 
that the book is, however, rather too prolix, that a 
good deal of compression would have made it 
more readable without loss of any essential matter, 
and that in her general criticism she scarcely seems 
to have grasped the essentials of Lippi's peculiar 
art. To the student of Italian art it comes as 
something of a surprise to find how completely 
Filippo Lippi captivated Florentine taste, how 
much more he was esteemed than other masters 
whom we should at first sight be inclined to 
prefer. Fraulein Mendelsohn scarcely seems 
to have faced this part of the question, or rather 
she tries to explain it on the grounds of the 
advances Lippi made in the representation of 
nature, and here she scarcely seems to realize 
how little he added, in how many directions he 
lagged behind the movement. She talks of his 
perspective and his space effects without realizing 
how empirical he was as compared with older artists 
like Masaccio and Fra Angelico. Nor does she 
realize how much Masolino may have influenced 
Lippi in his earlier years. Her suggestions of 
Northern influence on Lippi as shown in his 
affection for genre and in his crowded com- 
position does not seem borne out by any 
dehnite motives. What distinguished Lippi, 
what justified the intense admiration of his 
contemporaries was the purity and intensity 
of his sense of beauty. He had genius in the 
most modern acceptation of the word, with all 
its perversities, its irresponsible flights of fancy 
and its fundamental innocence. He touched his 
time as Verlaine has ours by a similar abandoned 
naivete of spirit. It was this that gave him his 
seductive charm, that inspired his unique feeling 
for sensual beauty and that more than counter- 
balanced in the eyes of his contemporaries the 
want of those more solid and scientific attainments 
with which his contemporaries were so richly 

In her list of Lippi's pictures Fraulein Mendel- 
sohn adopts an attitude of critical severity which 
is commendable. She even excludes while admi- 
ring it as a work of art, Lord Brownlow's Madonna 
which has generally been accepted. It must be 
admitted that the type of the Virgin is very unusual 
for Lippi, on the other hand the Child is entirely 
Lippesque. The meeting of Joachim and Anna 
at Oxford is also excluded and given (with Beren- 
son) to Pesellino. 

The illustrations are by no means worthy of so 
able and serious a study. 

Lancelot Blondeel, pictor Brugensis prae- 

STANTissiMUS. Par Pierre Bautier. 64 pp., 

15 illustrations. Bruxelles: Van Oest. 1910. 

This volume, almost exclusively devoted to the 

paintings attributed to Blondeel, is brightly written 

and fairly accurate ; the dates of the works having 
been established by documentary evidence, the 
tracing of the development of his style was 
rendered easy. Blondeel was above all a designer 
of decorations, and it was only after he had been 
for a score of years living in Bruges, surrounded 
by the masterpieces of the early Netherlandish 
school, that the composition and colouring of his 
works show any trace of his having been influenced 
by them, and, as M. Bautier remarks, his personal 
influence on the art of the painters settled in 
Bruges was of no effect. So far as painting is 
concerned, this is correct ; still it must be borne 
in mind that very few works by Bruges painters 
of the second and third quarters of the sixteenth 
century have come down to our time. The 
masters who exercised real and lasting influence, 
and who formed followers during that period, 
were, as in the previous century, all strangers who 
had learned their art and imbibed their principles 
elsewhere. It was Memlincand Gerard David and 
their pupils and followers who kept alive the 
traditions of the early school. 

Blondeel, however, unfortunately did exercise 
considerable influence on architecture and on 
many of the minor arts, for, as the documents 
published by me in 1908 show, he was constantly 
employed in making designs for the street fronts 
of buildings, for metal work, etc. 

It is to be regretted that M. Bautier has been 
led astray by others whose espvil de docker has led 
them to call Blondeel a hydraulic engineer. 

The illustrations and the general get up of the 
volume are good. At the end is a bibliography 
which is far from complete, and, not being 
chronologically arranged, is really of little use. 

W. H. J. W. 

Frank Brangwyn and his Work. By Walter 
Shaw-Sparrow. London : Kegan Paul, Trench, 
Triibner and Co. los. 6d. 

Mr. Shaw-Sparrow takes the criticsvery seriously. 
The greater part of his book is taken up with a 
spirited, if not always logical, defence of Mr. 
Brangwyn, for, with the exception of a few pages 
at the beginning devoted to a biographical sketch 
of the artist's life, there is scarcely one which does 
not contain some complaint of his treatment at 
the hands of the English critics. He gives copious 
extracts from the press, on which he comments. 
As a rule, he adopts a rather querulous tone, but 
occasionally he gets quite angry in dealing with 
adverse criticisms — ' libels of this blatant kind ' he 
calls them. It is not quite evident why this 
defence should have been undertaken. Has 
Mr. Brangwyn been so badly treated ? Has he 
suffered neglect ? Anyone would suppose, from 
Mr. Sparrow's book, that he has been the butt of 
all the critics, and has been misunderstood. 


Reviews and Notes 

Surely he has had a very fair share of piibHc and 
newspaper appreciation, and after all Mr. Sparrow 
overrates the importance of the critics. 'Their 
infinence,' he says, 'acts in two powerful ways: 
either encouraqing a man to make further efforts, 
or else hurting^him terribly in those moments of 
discontent which follow the excitement of creative 
efi'orts ' No reasoning man, nor any man absorbed 
in his work, allows himself to be hurt by the praise 
or blame dispensed weekly by the critics. One has 
only to watch their sudden changes of front, their 
dread of being thought old-fashioned, their craving 
for sensationalism (and post-sensationahsm), or 
to see a herd of them hurtling headlong like 
the Gadarene swine into deep water, and then- 
lack of conviction becomes quite evident. There 
are exceptions, but intelligent criticism of pamting 
is rare in England, and, in spite of Mr. Sparrow's 
assertions to the contrary, it is no more common 
in France, or in any other country. Enthusiasm 
is an excellent and even necessary virtue in a 
biographer, but one cannot help feeling that Mr. 
Sparrow has allowed his enthusiasm to outrun his 
judgment. It is always difficult to have a proper 
sense of proportion when dealing with a living 
artist, and in the present instance the praise given 
certainly seems a little extravagant, but it is very 
pleasant to find that Mr. Sparrow does not resort 
to the modern habit of belittling other living 
artists in order to enhance the reputation of his 

subject. , , ... 

The book is excellently got up and lavishly 
illustrated. It would have been better, certainly 
better for Mr. Brangwyn, if the reproductions m 
colour had been omitted. The few collotype plates 
of oil paintings given are so much pleasanter and 
more suggestive than the coloured plates, that 
they make one wish that that process had been 
employed throughout. The etchings and litho- 
graphs naturally suffer less than the paintings, 
and they gain enormously by reduction, 

G. C. 


Werner Weisbach. Berlin : Grotische 

Verlagsbuchhandlung. 1910. 
Dr WEISB.4CH has chosen a subject which gave 
opportunities for a most interesting revision of the 
whole history of ancient and modern art. Had 
he attached a definite meaning to impressionism 
and opposed it to another equally definite tendency 
in art, and then shown what were the conditions 
that made the balance turn now to one side, now 
to the other, much valuable light might have been 
thrown upon the history of the artist's psychology. 
Nor would this have been difficult had impres- 
sionism been extended, as logically it may be, to 
refer to all in art that has to do with the passive 
acceptance of appearance as opposed to the other 


tendency to find out and express not only the 
apparent but the actual nature of things. But such 
a book is still to be written. It never becomes 
evident that Dr. Weisbach has any clear idea of 
what he means by impressionism nor even by pic- 
torial (malerisch), which he uses as almost synony- 
mous, although a little reflection might have shown 
him that many distinctively pictorial methods are 
quite as distinct from the pictorial manner of 
impressionism as they are from the formal-plastic 
manner which he usually opposes to it. 

As it is, the author has run rapidly through the 
history of art, picking out here and there what- 
ever reminded him for one reason or another of 
modern impressionism. Sometimes mere rapidity 
of handling, ' sketchiness ' seems to be the ground 
of his choice; at others it is due to the complete- 
ness of the rendering of nature. Nowhere does he 
seem really to face the problem clearly. He passes 
over the surprising contrast between the (really) 
impressionist art of palaeolithic man to the 
intensely an